I am reading Greg Robertson's next book Stones into Schools. It is a more detailed account of his CAI activities of opening schools in the toughest terrain of Pakistan and Afghanistan. For me, it was taking lessons of running a non profit organisation ! Here are the four big lessons i have learnt from Greg Robertson's experience:
Lesson 1: If you want to change anything, 'include' the people whom you want to impact right from the start. Greg Robertson does not not build a school and invite the kids to attend them. Instead Robertson opens a school only after the village offers him three promises: Land for the school, labour for building the school and 50% of girls enrollment in three years of time. This ensures that the school is not imposed by CAI, but becomes part of local community. Until Greg gets this promise, he waits. In one village, Chunda, it took him 8 years to convince the Mullah to permit a single girl in a school. Now it has over 300 girls in the school.
Lesson 2: Find a toughest terrain that needs a school very 'badly'. Greg calls this principle 'Last place first'. ( By the way, this is against the normal principle of a non-profit who like to start their activities at the easiest possible location!) He therefore finds a location which is most difficult to access & survive.
In change management, it is known that people who change are the ones who have largest number of 'pain points'. Where there is largest pain, the chance of making change is always the highest. Because when people have pain, they are willing to make many changes: changes in their schedules, have lesser reservations, and are willing to go an extra mile to make it work. Robertson's implicitly seems to follow this basic lesson of change management.
Lesson 3: Narrow the focus of activities but cover all the elements impacting the central element. This is against the practice of non-profits, as they typically focus only on their chosen area, whether it is providing education, or building roads, or offering medical aid. But Greg Robertson provides money even for providing water to the village, or building bridges. In change management, this is called 'wholistic coverage of all the impacting elements'. All the elements surrounding the core element must be addressed to have an impact!
Lesson 4: Use local champions to impact the local schools. Greg Robertson manages his entire school-building organisation through his local Pakistani and Afghanistan leaders. They know the local language and culture, they know what can or cannot be done, and they bring credibility to the entire activity. When one remembers that Trust and Credibility are the only currency in the hands of non profits, one realises that one cannot sacrifice this principle at any cost.
Summary: These lessons are important because so much money is riding today on non profits. Donor foundations are huge and executing foundations are even bigger. But what is shocking is the lack of fundamental principles they follow in achieving their results. It is not money that makes the largest impact on the results of these institutions, conversely it is the least. What is needed is application of holistic thinking and rigor to ensure credibility , i guess. But both need time, and donor foundations, like most of the organisations, will rather sacrifice 'results' instead of sacrificing 'time'. Isn't that paradoxical?
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
How educated get pulled in terrorism?
I was reading about the psychological profiling of suicide bombers. Ariel Merari and Marc Sageman are some of the researchers in this field. I was shocked to find that some of my beliefs were blown to pieces.
For instance, suicide bombers do not belong to any religious sects even though violence is carried out in the name of religion. They are not the ignorant and uneducated ones. They are not the psychotics who want to harm others for the sake of harming. They are not even the 'humiliated' ones who want to get revenge for their 'anger'. They are not brainwashed simple people who merely follow orders. They are not unmarried vagabonds; infact three fourths are married individuals with kids.
So who are they? Although, they do not have a clear psychological profile, they share one very common characteristics with all of us: our need of approval and meaning in our lives. We all have a drive to be part of something larger than ourselves, to see ourself as special, and to be part of a group whose well-being is more important to us than our own life. This need is typically met by 'small-group dynamics' , the term used by psychologists to explain this phenomenon.
In it's positive form, it is therefore seen in corporate world, where small groups achieve something extraordinary achievements ( I remember the book written by Tracy Kidder on the discovery of first mini computer). It is seen in wars when small group of soldiers launch almost impossible missions that no normal man can ever think of. Japan's suicidal missions in second world war is attributed to this phenomenon. But such small groups are also observed close in our society. Some of them direct people towards self service where young girls are married to God, some of them are driven to God's service by giving up everything, some of them drive towards a very narrow cause such as sport clubs!
But in its negative form, this small group dynamics can evolve unknowingly or get created by a zealot. When Spanish authorities put some of the 2004 conspirators on trial, they were found to be from neighborhood in Northern Morocco. Jim Jones example of Jonestown in California in 1970's is the example of a person who created such a community which resulted into a mass suicide.
Their favorite hangout is not mosque or church, but a cafe. They live in their parallel universe. They may watch Al Jazeera to find support of their beliefs. They marry one another sisters. Entry in this community may be easy, but remaining in the community is very very difficult.
The central feature of this small group is that they seal off the outside world. We normal individuals are always pulled by different opinions and directions of the world which prevent us from seeing things in unidimensional terms. These small groups, in contrast, are deprived from the signals of the outside world, either by design or accident. For them, their small world becomes their entire world. No opinion from outside world is tolerated !
Do terrorists come and find them? No, it is infact the other way around. They go and find terrorists to recruit themselves for a bigger cause !
I feel we need to make sense of such counter-intuitive observations because, if we do not do this consciously, our brain does this for us unconsciously. These unconscious conclusions unwittingly form our 'beliefs', which over a period of time help us take actions or prevents us in taking right actions ! If we do not engage actively in this sense-making, we also forego the opportunity to 'shape' our lives.
For instance, suicide bombers do not belong to any religious sects even though violence is carried out in the name of religion. They are not the ignorant and uneducated ones. They are not the psychotics who want to harm others for the sake of harming. They are not even the 'humiliated' ones who want to get revenge for their 'anger'. They are not brainwashed simple people who merely follow orders. They are not unmarried vagabonds; infact three fourths are married individuals with kids.
So who are they? Although, they do not have a clear psychological profile, they share one very common characteristics with all of us: our need of approval and meaning in our lives. We all have a drive to be part of something larger than ourselves, to see ourself as special, and to be part of a group whose well-being is more important to us than our own life. This need is typically met by 'small-group dynamics' , the term used by psychologists to explain this phenomenon.
In it's positive form, it is therefore seen in corporate world, where small groups achieve something extraordinary achievements ( I remember the book written by Tracy Kidder on the discovery of first mini computer). It is seen in wars when small group of soldiers launch almost impossible missions that no normal man can ever think of. Japan's suicidal missions in second world war is attributed to this phenomenon. But such small groups are also observed close in our society. Some of them direct people towards self service where young girls are married to God, some of them are driven to God's service by giving up everything, some of them drive towards a very narrow cause such as sport clubs!
But in its negative form, this small group dynamics can evolve unknowingly or get created by a zealot. When Spanish authorities put some of the 2004 conspirators on trial, they were found to be from neighborhood in Northern Morocco. Jim Jones example of Jonestown in California in 1970's is the example of a person who created such a community which resulted into a mass suicide.
Their favorite hangout is not mosque or church, but a cafe. They live in their parallel universe. They may watch Al Jazeera to find support of their beliefs. They marry one another sisters. Entry in this community may be easy, but remaining in the community is very very difficult.
The central feature of this small group is that they seal off the outside world. We normal individuals are always pulled by different opinions and directions of the world which prevent us from seeing things in unidimensional terms. These small groups, in contrast, are deprived from the signals of the outside world, either by design or accident. For them, their small world becomes their entire world. No opinion from outside world is tolerated !
Do terrorists come and find them? No, it is infact the other way around. They go and find terrorists to recruit themselves for a bigger cause !
I feel we need to make sense of such counter-intuitive observations because, if we do not do this consciously, our brain does this for us unconsciously. These unconscious conclusions unwittingly form our 'beliefs', which over a period of time help us take actions or prevents us in taking right actions ! If we do not engage actively in this sense-making, we also forego the opportunity to 'shape' our lives.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
How & when to fight terrorism?
Now in India, we see terrorism so close to us. When the bomb blasts started in 1990s, it was a shock. After the initial shock has receded, we do not worry about the blasts as much because they happen in trains, buses, shops and cars. And we as citizens do not know what we can do to fight terrorism.
On the one hand, Government focus is on corrective measure: increase police security measures, install CCTV cameras, equip police force with bomb-detection devices, train commandos. Building awareness of citizens to spot a suspicious activity is where we can perhaps play a small role. But all these measures are corrective. They do not help us prevent terrorism because the source of terrorism is elsewhere.
Sociologists and Social researchers all agree that the root cause of terrorism is in lack of education & lack of employable opportunities for the youth. Fundamentalists merely use this 'root cause' by channelising pent-up frustration of youth towards a target through proven tested tools of religion and philosophy. Hitler used the supremacy of his sect to bring together largest population of army, while today's Taliban uses religion. In 1940s, the only known form of terrorism was launching war against the entire country, while in 200O the war is fought within the country in pockets. Although terrorism form has changed, its essence has remained the same.
Until we human beings therefore muster the patience to address the root cause, we shall have no respite from terrorism. We need to fight terrorism by using preventive measures, by nipping the bud of terrorism. Corrective measures, although necessary, are never enough. Most of us believe that preventive measures are costly.
Now look at the arithmetic of spending on preventive measures versus corrective measures. In the war against Taliban, some 340 missile hawks were used. While a missile costs 840,000 US $, a student's supplies for entire year in Afghanistan costs 20 US$ and teacher's salary is 600 US $ per year. ( And this is just part of war cost!) Greg Mortenson estimates that at a cost of one missile, about 20000 students in Pakistan would have been educated. With that must lesser availability of potential recruits, we perhaps could be spending far less today on fighting the war against terrorism in our countries. In other words, preventive measures are not costly.
However, as you would have noticed, preventive measures take time to bear fruit. One cannot educate a Pakistani youth in a day or month. It takes time. So one has to find the balance between spending time and effort on preventive and corrective measures. If Governments are spending on short-term corrective measures, we as citizens can spend on corrective long-term measures.
Luckily we have an option today. We can help an intrepid climber, Greg Mortenson, who since 1993 has build more than 50 schools in one of the toughest territory of Pakistan and Afghanistan. His site www.ikat.org shows the regions where his schools are running. If you want to read about his courageous journey, please read Three cups of tea. More surprisingly, he has focused on girl's education, which is even better in terms of addressing the basic cause.
We therefore are lucky that we can fight terrorism today by addressing the fundamental cause of terrorism, while Government plays it short-term corrective role. Based on our earnings, we can contribute as little or as much money to Greg Mortenson's institute for building these schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
On the one hand, Government focus is on corrective measure: increase police security measures, install CCTV cameras, equip police force with bomb-detection devices, train commandos. Building awareness of citizens to spot a suspicious activity is where we can perhaps play a small role. But all these measures are corrective. They do not help us prevent terrorism because the source of terrorism is elsewhere.
Sociologists and Social researchers all agree that the root cause of terrorism is in lack of education & lack of employable opportunities for the youth. Fundamentalists merely use this 'root cause' by channelising pent-up frustration of youth towards a target through proven tested tools of religion and philosophy. Hitler used the supremacy of his sect to bring together largest population of army, while today's Taliban uses religion. In 1940s, the only known form of terrorism was launching war against the entire country, while in 200O the war is fought within the country in pockets. Although terrorism form has changed, its essence has remained the same.
Until we human beings therefore muster the patience to address the root cause, we shall have no respite from terrorism. We need to fight terrorism by using preventive measures, by nipping the bud of terrorism. Corrective measures, although necessary, are never enough. Most of us believe that preventive measures are costly.
Now look at the arithmetic of spending on preventive measures versus corrective measures. In the war against Taliban, some 340 missile hawks were used. While a missile costs 840,000 US $, a student's supplies for entire year in Afghanistan costs 20 US$ and teacher's salary is 600 US $ per year. ( And this is just part of war cost!) Greg Mortenson estimates that at a cost of one missile, about 20000 students in Pakistan would have been educated. With that must lesser availability of potential recruits, we perhaps could be spending far less today on fighting the war against terrorism in our countries. In other words, preventive measures are not costly.
However, as you would have noticed, preventive measures take time to bear fruit. One cannot educate a Pakistani youth in a day or month. It takes time. So one has to find the balance between spending time and effort on preventive and corrective measures. If Governments are spending on short-term corrective measures, we as citizens can spend on corrective long-term measures.
Luckily we have an option today. We can help an intrepid climber, Greg Mortenson, who since 1993 has build more than 50 schools in one of the toughest territory of Pakistan and Afghanistan. His site www.ikat.org shows the regions where his schools are running. If you want to read about his courageous journey, please read Three cups of tea. More surprisingly, he has focused on girl's education, which is even better in terms of addressing the basic cause.
We therefore are lucky that we can fight terrorism today by addressing the fundamental cause of terrorism, while Government plays it short-term corrective role. Based on our earnings, we can contribute as little or as much money to Greg Mortenson's institute for building these schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Is 3 idiots a copy of Chetan Bhagat's book?
My friend gave me Chetan Bhagat's ' Five point Someone' book to read because he argued strongly for his proposition that the movie 3 Idiots is 90% copy of the book. I had also heard argument from some other friends that 3 Idiots is as as different as chalk is from cheese. I therefore decided to read it.
Surprisingly, copyright law does not offer any guidance on this. In literature, copying even a small scene is considered to be a breach of copyright. In a song, however, even a small difference of drum beat in an original song is not considered to be a copy of the original song. Copyright in the field of drug and patent seems to be in a more firmer foundation, although some argue that it also needs overhaul.
And more importantly, in the field of arts, copyright seems to be ignoring the basic source of creativity. Creativity is about tweaking old ideas, combining two ideas in a different recipe or even just transforming the old idea in a new context of today. For instance, a song is about playing the seven sounds - sa,re,ga ma, pa, da, ni, sa in a different juxtaposition. One can claim that no new song can be created from the same components, if one goes by the strict definition of what is copy. Every new song today can easily be traced to some old song !
So is 3 Idiots ( 3 I ) a copy of Five point sometime ( FPS)? If we try to answer this question just by our emotions, we would be just pouring fuel to the fire without shedding any light. So let us use our head instead. Here is therefore an attempt to answer this question by using the basic principle of literature. In literature, a story is defined by four elements: theme, plot, characters and style.
- How similar are the themes of 3 Idiot and FPS? 3 Idiots theme is about 'Do what is close to your heart' or 'Live in today' while FPS seems to be 'Even an average score person is not-so-average in many respects'.
- How similar is the plot of 3 Idiots and FPS ? Basic plot of 3 Idiot ( based on 3 friends) is similar to FPS plot. However, there are many differences if we peel the onion. While the story of one protagonist ( Sharman) is very similar to FVP story, story of main protagonist ( Aamir Khan) is entirely different. While the story of antagonist ( Boman Irani) is similar to the FPS plot, story of third protagonist , Madhavan, is entirely different ( his painting interest has been brought out starkly to push the main theme in 3 idiots). Story of heroine in 3I is different than in FPS. Chatur's story is completely different in 3 Idiots.
Due to the difference in theme, some events in FPS have lost it's significance in 3 Idiots. For instance, although 'copying the paper' event is similar in both, it has been used very differently in 3 Idiots. In FPS, copying the paper is used for climax, but in 3 Idiots it is just an event to build up the climax. Heroine's sister's pregnancy has been used as a climax event in 3 Idiots.
- How similar are the characters of 3 Idiots and FPS ? Characterisations of main protagonist is dissimilar. Aamir Khan is shown to be extraordinarily intelligent than Ryan in FPS, but he shares the same characteristics of 'doing anything for friends' with Aamir Khan. Sharman's main characteristics of 'being afraid of the world' is not starkly brought out in FPS as it is in 3 Idiots. Boman Irani's characterisation seem to be very similar to FPS. Even the basic background of his son committing suicide is similar. Heroine's characterisation does not seem to have any similarity.
- Style of 3 Idiots versus of FPS. Although style is very different ( Flashbank versus first person style) this cannot be compared strictly simply because the mediums are different.
Given the above similarities and dissimilarities, my view is that 3 Idiot is very dissimilar to FPS, although many commonalities exist. What is your verdict?
Surprisingly, copyright law does not offer any guidance on this. In literature, copying even a small scene is considered to be a breach of copyright. In a song, however, even a small difference of drum beat in an original song is not considered to be a copy of the original song. Copyright in the field of drug and patent seems to be in a more firmer foundation, although some argue that it also needs overhaul.
And more importantly, in the field of arts, copyright seems to be ignoring the basic source of creativity. Creativity is about tweaking old ideas, combining two ideas in a different recipe or even just transforming the old idea in a new context of today. For instance, a song is about playing the seven sounds - sa,re,ga ma, pa, da, ni, sa in a different juxtaposition. One can claim that no new song can be created from the same components, if one goes by the strict definition of what is copy. Every new song today can easily be traced to some old song !
So is 3 Idiots ( 3 I ) a copy of Five point sometime ( FPS)? If we try to answer this question just by our emotions, we would be just pouring fuel to the fire without shedding any light. So let us use our head instead. Here is therefore an attempt to answer this question by using the basic principle of literature. In literature, a story is defined by four elements: theme, plot, characters and style.
- How similar are the themes of 3 Idiot and FPS? 3 Idiots theme is about 'Do what is close to your heart' or 'Live in today' while FPS seems to be 'Even an average score person is not-so-average in many respects'.
- How similar is the plot of 3 Idiots and FPS ? Basic plot of 3 Idiot ( based on 3 friends) is similar to FPS plot. However, there are many differences if we peel the onion. While the story of one protagonist ( Sharman) is very similar to FVP story, story of main protagonist ( Aamir Khan) is entirely different. While the story of antagonist ( Boman Irani) is similar to the FPS plot, story of third protagonist , Madhavan, is entirely different ( his painting interest has been brought out starkly to push the main theme in 3 idiots). Story of heroine in 3I is different than in FPS. Chatur's story is completely different in 3 Idiots.
Due to the difference in theme, some events in FPS have lost it's significance in 3 Idiots. For instance, although 'copying the paper' event is similar in both, it has been used very differently in 3 Idiots. In FPS, copying the paper is used for climax, but in 3 Idiots it is just an event to build up the climax. Heroine's sister's pregnancy has been used as a climax event in 3 Idiots.
- How similar are the characters of 3 Idiots and FPS ? Characterisations of main protagonist is dissimilar. Aamir Khan is shown to be extraordinarily intelligent than Ryan in FPS, but he shares the same characteristics of 'doing anything for friends' with Aamir Khan. Sharman's main characteristics of 'being afraid of the world' is not starkly brought out in FPS as it is in 3 Idiots. Boman Irani's characterisation seem to be very similar to FPS. Even the basic background of his son committing suicide is similar. Heroine's characterisation does not seem to have any similarity.
- Style of 3 Idiots versus of FPS. Although style is very different ( Flashbank versus first person style) this cannot be compared strictly simply because the mediums are different.
Given the above similarities and dissimilarities, my view is that 3 Idiot is very dissimilar to FPS, although many commonalities exist. What is your verdict?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)