The 1 Question That Matters Most...

As a kid, I loved sweets – especially kulfi. When I was 7, I attended a wedding where the kulfi was really tasty. I didn't stop at 1 plate. As I helped myself to a 3^rd, my mom scornfully looked at me and said “Don’t eat so much.” “Why?” I asked. “Because it’s bad manners.” Being a typical 7-year old, I ignored her, finished my plate and took another one. My dad, who presumably had been watching my gluttonery, asked me “How many plates of kulfi would you order if you invited 100 people to a wedding?” “100”, I said, stout chested, proud of my maths. “And how many people will get to kulfi if you eat 4 plates?” he questioned. “96.” Suddenly I started feeling bad. “So 4 people at this wedding will not get to eat kulfi. If you really want, I’ll buy you your favourite ice cream after we leave from here”. I readily agreed. This 7 year old had no problems with the answer his father gave for his question – Why?

Our thoughts, behaviours and actions stem from a single question – Why? This question arises from the most ancient part of our brain – the amygdala. What we do and how we do it are results of the answers and are formed in the neo-cortex, the more recently developed lobe in our brain.

Whatever we may say, there always is an eventual reason for our actions. The reason why one buys a Blackberry shirt goes beyond a simple “because it’s good.” It’s because he’s asked himself why he should buy the shirt and his brain responded by saying that it fits him well and makes him look good. The quality and colour are secondary. The buyer buys it because his “Why” has been answered, though he may not fully be aware of it. Successful marketers and companies selling stuff stimulate our amygdala; they create an emotional bond with us. They give us a reason to buy from them. Simon Sinek, in the video below, explains why Apple is such a thriving company while competition is always playing catch up.

Wasn't it awesome? People don’t buy what you do; they buy why you do it. Which probably explains why Steve Jobs was so kick ass. By the time he was 25, he was worth $100 million. But it didn't matter to him. Why? Because he wanted to put a dent in the universe, not just make money. Martin Luther King’s & Gandhi’s ‘Why’ got them millions of followers. Why do people follow a good leader? Again, it’s beyond the “she’s a great person” dialogue. It’s because she inspires them, makes them feel good and cared for. The same concept goes for why a person may be despised.

So remember, if you want your spouse, girlfriend, boyfriend, or peers to do something or desist from it, you have to address their main question – Why? Why should they do what you say; what’s in it for them? If you’re a parent or a manager, this becomes even more important. You want your children and/or subordinates to look up to you, right? So, if you want to bring about a change, you must address their “Why”. Like my dad did. The “because I said so” techniques won’t get you far. Then again, the question is – Why do you want your bidding done? For your good, or for theirs?

Forget the world, look at yourself. Why do you start a venture? Is it merely to make money or because you see a need in society which you can fulfill  If it’s the former, you almost certainly will fail. Why do you want to become a musician? Is it because you want to make beautiful music or just get laid? If it’s the latter, you may score the odd college-going girl, but you’ll never be a good musician. Why do you blog? Is it just to get hits or because you genuinely want to tell people something? If it’s just the former, your quality will barely improve. And while you may attract traffic through various sources, you barely will have any quality in that either. Why are you helping someone? Is it because you expect them to help you in return or is it just a selfless act? Once again, if it’s the former, you’re most certainly bound to get hurt if they don’t reciprocate.

It’s the thought and not merely the action that helps you achieve excellence and nobility. We live in a world where we’re judged every day. Plus, as Captain Jack Sparrow says “The world is the same. There’s just less in it.” We keep reading and hearing appalling news each day that shakes our faith just that little bit more. Staying noble and true to your values becomes difficult, but not impossible. Ask yourself the question ‘Why’ before you do something. Keep your intentions clean and your actions will follow suit. Your character will form your reputation and not vice versa. Live like all your actions will appear on the front page of the newspapers. For all you know, someday they will.

When the Stakes Are High...

Ever seen certain people perform when the plenty hangs on the results? Or have you tried concentrating on an activity knowing that the the outcome depends heavily on you and will impact many others? Tried riding/driving when you had to get to some place urgently? Watched a race where a driver tries real hard to pass someone in front, makes a move and ends up throwing away all his hard work? Ever wonder why we mess up when it matters most?

Yerkes and Dodson had conducted an experiment on rats in the early 1900s (one that will not please animal activists). It involved leaving a rat in a caged maze. When the rats would go through an incorrect door, they would get a slight shock. Those slight shocks would make the rats simply motor along to find the right door. The scientists thought if they upped the level of shock, the rats would be motivated to learn faster. But the results proved otherwise. When the level of shock was very high, the rats couldn’t concentrate! They lost the ability to think straight and find patterns. The high level of shock was just too high for the rats to focus on anything because of fear. They had lots of trouble remembering which parts of the cage were safe and were unable to find the exit. Yerkes and Dodson called this the Inverted – U principle. It states that the performance of an individual, beyond a level, starts dropping as the level of stimulus increases.

Yerkes & Dodson's Inverted-U Theory

We humans react in a similar manner when the stakes are high. Senior bosses, who are offered obscene salaries and bonuses, are forever under pressure to perform. They want to justify their salaries so bad that they start making bad decisions, decisions which to a rank outsider vary from silly to downright dumb. Or they resort to unethical schemes to spike up performance momentarily. When we work very hard on something where the stakes are high, we concentrate on what the outcome MUST BE! No slip up, no mistake; we must not screw up anywhere or the consequences will be severe. In those moments, we lose concentration. We lose our skill, our competence. This negative motivation works against us. Share traders, CEOs, racers; this rule of thumb applies to everyone! Does this apply in sex too? Experienced people can provide some insights ;)

I’ve ridden/driven like a maniac when I’ve been in a real hurry; where I thought a second’s delay would prove fatal. The result? I’ve reached 5 – 7 minutes before the time I took when I cruised along. On the other hand, when I ride fast with a free mind, there have been instances when I’ve halved the time taken (same destination, same amount of traffic). Shows that a free mind amplifies your performance while a heavily burdened one restricts it (imagine, when you need it most).

Lord Krishna, in the Bhagwad Gita, says “Focus on the outcome, not the action.” Makes sense. The only catch is it’s hard to implement. Employees work too hard to appease their bosses rather than focusing on the task at hand, software engineers work at double the pace to complete a deadline, etc... and the result? You get the point, right? There’s always a next time. One slip up is not the end of the world. This is a lesson for managers too. Don’t burden your employees with too much or try to motivate them with too much responsibility... it often backfires.

This rule may be somewhat contrary to what successful entrepreneurs go through in the initial phases. The most successful ones have gone been through times when they’ve had to succeed or their families would be on the road. But there has to be some part of this rule that has applied to them. Some part of life where they’ve worked without thinking about the outcome which has led them to where they are. The best performers (Sachin Tendulkar, Rafael Nadal... you can add any name you want...) don't worry about the consequences. They excel at their work and leave the outcome to God.

Thus, dear friends, we work better when we don’t inflate the stakes and not vice versa. Too much motivation is not good for any living being. Aamir Khan said in 3 Idiots “Don’t focus on success. Focus on excellence, and success will follow.” Let’s try making that a way of life. Let’s focus on doing a really good job of the task at hand. Try following this principle and tell me if it works. Cheers!

Unparliamentary Behaviour, Really?

I will focus my attention today from daily musings to a phrase in English – ‘Unparliamentary Behaviour.’

I was fooling around in office one day, pulling people’s legs (something I’m good at) when one of the copywriters told me to stop my ‘Unparliamentary Behaviour’. And that’s when the discussion started.

I am not the 1^st to question this term; it’s been questioned by a lot of people before. But how did the people who coined the term agree to it in the 1^st place? Yes, ‘Unparliamentary Behaviour’ is a term to describe unruly behaviour on the part of a person/people. Quite a paradox, that! Not just India, parliaments across the world have witnessed various instances of more than mere unruly behaviour while the house has been in motion.

It’s hard to find images of unruly parliamentary behaviour online, but Isreal, Zimbabwe, Nepal, India, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, etc. have all seen many instances of vandalism in the parliament. Research states that about 22% of the parliament’s time is lost due to such misbehaviour. Australia and some other countries have proposed a fine on politicians who misbehave and cause damage in the parliament. This should rein in those hooligans. Pity it won’t work in India, though...

So, is ‘unparliamentary’ an apt term for unruly behaviour? You would agree it should be the opposite, isn’t it? ‘Parliamentary Behaviour’, right? But it’s highly unlikely this change in diction will be implemented because it’s gonna be a major blotch on the so – called image of these politicians.

I still don’t get it! Do these politicians & bureaucrats assume their behaviour is an example for us? Where is the correlation between misbehaviour and behaviour of bureaucrats?  My office colleague and I are still scratching our heads. Someone please make sense of it for me! :(