Birthday wishes by AB on Twitter

To be a Leader or a Manager?

As the BJP leadership crisis enters its penultimate hour and the heated debate on the rise of managers in the “party with a difference” still manages to hit newspaper headlines, it becomes vital to understand what separates a manager from a leader. BJP since its inception was known to be a party of leaders and not managers like the erstwhile Congress, but the 90s saw the rise of managers in the BJP as well. It was this which led to the coining of a new term by political analysts - “Congressization of the BJP.” The term sounds trendy but larger and deeper questions remain to be addressed, the biggest of them being – the difference between a Leader and a Manager.

For many, a good leader is the one who successfully manages an election campaign and comes out winning the election. But then the question arises, if this person is the leader then who is the manager? Playing Devil’s advocate will help us to realize that the one whom we had been considering as leaders weren’t actually leaders but managers, who just have a short term objective which in this case was to win the elections. For an ideal leader, the vision replaces the objective making it broader and larger not for the benefit of the individual but for the benefit of the country, for the benefit of people and lastly for the benefit of the party and that too beyond electoral success.

Today, both the terms are interchangeably used without understanding the significance of the either, and more importantly what these two different terms stand for. The definition that clears the air is “Managers are concerned with doing things right, but Leaders are the one who do the Right things.” Also, further in understanding the difference between the two, another major point which one should realize is that the leader is the “problem maker.” Well not in the literal sense of course, but in the sense that it is the leader who actually identifies something wrong and recognizes a problem. This might as well lead us to say, “if it wasn’t for the leaders, there would not have been any problems” as even if there were inconsistencies present they would not have got noticed by managers as managers are the ones maintaining a status quo. In sharp contrast, a leader is the one whose highest desire is to bring about change. Leaders are also the ones who actually believe in empowering people through decentralization of power unlike a manager who would prefer to concentrate power. This leads to managers ending up demanding respect whereas leaders command respect.

Leaders are risk takers as well, who go against the tide whereas managers are the risk minimizers who see to it that minimal damage is suffered like seen in the Karnataka BJP crisis wherein the managers from the party reduced the risk of the Government collapsing rather than taking a risk of challenging the Reddy brothers. A leader is the one who gives the ship a direction while a manager steers the ship towards it. The Ramjanmabhoomi Movement is a perfect example of it where the Charioteer, Mr. LK. Advani was the leader whereas the Sarthi, Mr. Pramod Mahajan was his manager. This also vaguely leads us to derive that in today’s competitive politics, the idealism of a Leader in itself isn’t enough to come to power and hence, it becomes important for the leaders to take the help of boardroom strategists (read managers) to win the race for achieving power. And it doesn’t end here, even as the leaders capture power i.e. their means of serving the people; they still need the help of managers in the form of bureaucrats to fulfill their dream, their vision. Last but not least, a leader’s concern is with “What is Right” whereas a manager’s is being Right. Thus, unlike a manager, leadership is not a permanent role but more of an act which is need based.

As someone aptly put it, “Managers are necessary, but Leaders are Essential”

Dostana

The much hyped film of 2008 was in news for its blatant exhibition of homosexuality. Though the film didn’t ridicule nor did it justify homosexuality, same sex love stood as the USP of that film. Most of us as will admit that when we hear someone say "Dostana" the immediate thing which comes to our mind is homosexuality. Though I do agree that homosexuality was a background on which the film was made to humour the audience and make it a commercial success, but at the same time I refuse to accept that Dostana was a senseless film and an out n out commercial film with no morals or story whatsoever.

If I may point out, looking at the title itself that the film wasn't just about homo sexuality but about "friendship." And the friendship here isn't just limited to AB and John but the trio which included Priyanka. The film talks about how people make sacrifices in friendship and how much important is friendship like other blood ties.

It starts with AB and John joining hands and giving up their ambition to get into a romantic fling with Priyanka in order to not lose her friendship. And they do everything one can to get their best pal back which includes kissing in a club in front of the whole world in spite of them not being gay. They don’t care about themselves nor have any egos but just the desire to have Priyanka back as their buddy is what motivates them for the act.

But according to me the high point of the film lies in the last segment where Priyanka actually gives up her dream man Bobby Deol to get back to her friends who indeed cared and loved her more than anyone else. Even Bobby Deol accepted the decision and it was a mutual decision for Piggy Chops and Bobby to part ways for friendship.

And this was the biggest exhibition of "Dostana" in the film wherein an individual leaves her new found love for her best friends. It was very unfortunate that last week it was Friendship's Day and people failed to remember Dostana. There are several best friends who actually claim and make promises on these grounds that friendship is more important than their romantic life. Haven't really come across some individual who has stuck to such promises made even at a time when there have been years gone in nurturing the friendship while this new found love is just a few months old. But yeah surely there have been people claiming to be the best friends but then there are questions asked, "Should I leave the love of my life (who is just say a few months old) for your friendship (which supposedly years old)?"

This category of people is confused to make a call between old friends or new found love. If the happiness of these friends is more important then why not leave our own selfish interest and do the "right" thing? If one fears breaking the heart of this new found love, why doesn't that individual fear breaking the heart of the best friend? And doesn't this best friend love the individual as well? At times, I think if these people are honest with their new found love (and indeed if this new love is worth the love he/she is getting); it is this new found love who should actually initiate the decision making process because if one truely respects love, he/she should respect love in all relationships be it blood relationship or friendship or a romantic relationship.

I just warn those who actually are in the middle of such a situation to not wait for the "right" time to make their call but decide before it’s too late and their best friends give up on them. It won't just be an insult of those individuals but an insult of "love", "trust" and "friendship". And a new relationship cannot sustain at such a big insult shown to the above mentioned virtues. It might be easy to let go of best friends for the rest of the world but for people like me it is very difficult and painful especially where somewhere even after your best friend shatters your trust, you still wait for that best friend to come back to you in spite of the fact that the individual isn't sure which way to go.

Love i.e. Selflessness - A virtue

Many people try to define "love" and partly do successfully explain what Love indeed is but never have I come across any definition which was able to define love in completeness. Which led me to a quest to understand what "love" indeed is. Maybe it took me to go to the US, to completely understand what love actually stood for. And I know as I have raised the issue of "love" there will be certainly eye brows raised especially when it is Devendra Pai who is talking about it.

Let me take a moment and make it clear that, "love" should not be always connected with "romance." Love is something morre than that. Romance might be a minor part of the "love" between 2 life partners but then

isn't a mothers "love" towards her child - "love?"

isn't a brother's love for his sister - "love?"

It doesn't stop at this. What about the love with which the Warkari community go to Pandharpur with? They go there just because of their love for the God and nothing beyond it.

Does God come and welcome them?

Does God talk to them?

Does God bestow them with riches?

But in spite of all negative answers to the question. The Warkaris go to meet their lord with the same affection which I think only increases by their every experience because their "love" for the lord isn't result oriented and I think if it is result oriented, it would be never called as "love." And it is this time that it struck me that "love" and "selflessness" go together and "love" is incomplete without it.

Think about Ram and Bharat's love where bharat had no intention for being the king or Radha, who continued to love Krishna in spite of Krishna being married off to someone else. And this makes me wonder, why then in the present world have become so selfish and result oriented and then call it "love?" Are they actually being fair to "love"....I had come across a text message saying "I Love you is actually a statement and not a question then why do people expect answers to it."

And it is this western culture of being result oriented rather then being "karma oriented" which actually said "good karma" should be done regardless of any results. If one wins its good enough but then one should not get disappointed with failures. This is what Bhagwad Gita teaches. It teaches that "act" shouldbe done regardless of results for the sake of it and the real result is in commiting the act itself. To stick to the "right" thing. And "Rightness", "selflessness", "justice" and "love" go together in the same direction.

Similar reading -http://divsispace.blogspot.com/2008/03/four-letter-wordlove.html

One on my friends has written a similar piece on her blog. If you liked my article you will like this write up as well.

Relationships - Sit back and Ruminate

I have a small collection of good text messages which I thought of sharing on this space which seem like just a collage of words but are equal to one whole blog entry which I make. As you will go through them, we will realize (like I had) that if every individual takes these forwards seriously then how come there are these troubles in interpersonal relationships. Well, surely the world indeed will be a better place to live in if each and every individual will follow them true to the heart. But at the same time, let me tell you that the path isn't easy as it seems to be. One has just control over oneself and can't just control feelings of other people how much ever close one assumes that individual to be. Disappointments are bound to happen but still, as responsible "human beings" we can not just let go of spreading goodness as I had said in my earlier blog entry. So just sit back and Ruminate!

* Distance cannot seperate anyone, Time cannot bind anyone. If feelins are true from heart, Just close your eyes and You can find anyone

* Dont ever be angry on your loved ones, because upto the last moment of you life what hurts is not the words of our enemies but silence of our loved ones.

* You can never find a perfect friend in me, because what makes me human is my imperfection. But this would be for sure that i will always be your friend not perfect but TRUE

* Apologizing does not mean you are wrong and the other is right...It just means that you value personal relationships more than personal EGO

* Two ways to make a relationship lasting - Dont make it before understanding and dont break it after a misunderstanding

* Staying far never breaks relation, staying near never makes relation. It's a link between hearts, which never allow us to forgeteach other

* Sometimes missing is more precious than being together, because we only miss the people who we never want to miss in life

* "Close" and "Open" are actually opposites to each other. Yet in real life, we are only "open" to people with whom we are really "close".

* World's most beautiful sentence "But, I'm with you." World's most painful sentence "I am with you, But"

* Life is not about finding the right person, but creating the right relation. Its not how much we care in the beginning but how much we care till the end.

* Time alone can prove the worth of relationships. As time goes by we lose the false ones and the best ones stay.

* In life Don't trust people whose feelins change with time, instead trust those people whose feelings remain the same with changing times.

* Friendship is not just a word & not a simple relationship. its a silent promise which says, I will be with you Wherever, Whenever, Forever!

* Love isn't about expressing heavy words. Its about understanding a gentle touch and pure heart.

* Good relationships dont need any promises, any terms or conditions. It just needs 2 wonderful people. Not "U" and "Me" but "We."

* Relationship isn't about who came first or who came last or care more or who cares best but about who came and never left!

* If you trust a person till the very end, whatever the result maybe you will either have a good friend or a good lesson in the end.

P.S. - I would like to acknowledge Elita for actually inspiring this blog entry as well as the title of the blog (she might sue me tomorrow). A brilliant thinker she is, I could not match up to her thinking capacity and rather than coming out with my own one liners to ruminate I preferred to stick with the tried and tested, easy to get but deep in meaning text messages.)

Why is there Lack of Goodness in this World?

I have been engaged in a lot of philosophizing off late, so this piece would be one which will set a precedent and other write ups will follow soon. Coming back to the topic, why is there a lack of goodness in the world?

Everyone says this. That yes, "people have become bad", "this is kalyug", blah blah... But as anyone taken off time to at least sit back and think "why is this so?" rather than just cribbing and complaining about the dearth of happiness.

Fortunately, I have. Its better late than never they say. The process started as I was watching "Bunty aur Babli" about a month back. It was after more than a year that I was watching this film as I had nothing worthwhile to do nor anything good to watch on TV. Being a diehard AB fan and a Rani Mukherjee admirer, I continued with the film just for the sake on enjoying these 2 actors. But as I started watching the film, my objective of watching the film changed. The film, which was thwarted by me months after it released, now actually started meaning a lot to me. Even you might be wondering what that was...

It was the fact that both Bunty and Babli became criminals because of the world. They tried their accomplishing their dreams in a very good and honesty way but only to realize that others had taken undue advantage of their virtues. And this disappointment finally led to both Bunty and Babli taking up a criminal path to take revenge from the world. "If you can be bad, even we can be bad too."

And this is thus not just a story of Bunty and Babli but "aam aadmi" i.e. "Mango people." Who start with honesty and goodness but then as the world ridicules this virtue of theirs, the same people end up as violators of their very own principles. Though they don't want to do that by choice but by compulsion as they think "there isn’t any way to survive this cruel world." And it is thus, very wrong to blame these people only because they have turned bad. What we need to ask ourselves is "at least if we can't be good ourselves, can't we just reciprocate this goodness to the good people and help sustain whatever goodness is remaining in the world.

Recently, I have been through a similar situation where I don't think my goodness was taken seriously. This has ultimately led to a reduction of goodness in me as an immediate reflex and a slapstick reply to that offender of goodness. But then, I have still decided to stick with my general idea of being good. Because, if everyone starts giving up goodness because of "individual violators of goodness" then this world will definitely go to the dogs sooner than expected. It would be a shame that not only these "violators" do not contribute in goodness but also discourage the ones who are contributing. And they don't just reduce the number of good people but increase the number of violators.

What we should do, like discussed in Delhi 6 is to look at ourselves from a 3rd persons perspective. Ask ourselves looking at the mirror, "Will I like it if x did that to me what I did to y" or at least think in a very detached way from oneself and ask the question like I do "Is Devendra doing the Right thing?"

I know it isn't easy to be "Good" and "Ethical" all the time but at the end of the day, the satisfaction which one gets of doing the "Right" thing is always worth it. And also the fact that, these "good" people are the ones who are actually indeed contributing to make the World a "Better Place to Live in"

"If the Bad don't stop being bad, why should the Good stop being Good." - Abhishek Bachchan

Hello people, I know it has beeen a very loong time since I last posted here. Will get back to regular psotings from this week onwards. Thanks