5778889 – Techniques and Principles

5W of Decision making

1. What
2. Why
3. When
4. Where
5. How

7 C of Customer Satisfaction

1. Consistent Quality
2. Committed delivery
3. Customized product mix
4. Contemporary products
5. Competitive price
6. Complaint settlement
7. Culture of customer service

7 S SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threats) analyses

1. Strategy
2. Structure
3. System
4. Style
5. Staff
6. Skills
7. Shared values

8 habits of highly effective people

1. First understand before you seek to be understand
2. Synergize
3. Win, Win
4. Be proactive
5. Keep end in mind – Goal orientation
6. First thing first – Prioritization
7. Sharpening the axe
8. From effectiveness to greatness

8 Total Quality Management principles

1. Vision
2. Philosophy
3. Value
4. Symbol
5. Goal
6. Benchmark
7. Metrics
8. Tools and methodology.

8 Quality management principles

1. Customer focus
2. Leadership
3. Involvement of people
4. Process approach
5. System approach to management
6. Factual approach to decision making
7. Continual improvement
8. Mutually beneficial supplier relationships

9M of Quality management

1. Man
2. Material
3. Machine
4. Measurement
5. Market
6. Money
7. Method
8. Message
9. Management

-- Sanat Sharma

Human Resource Management with Physics

Albert Einstein (14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) was a German-born theoretical physicist. He is best known for his theory of relativity and specifically mass–energy equivalence, E = mc ². Einstein received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics for his services to Theoretical Physics.

In physics, mass–energy equivalence is the concept that any mass has an associated energy and vice versa. In special relativity this relationship is expressed using the mass–energy equivalence formula

E = mc ²

Where

· E = energy,

· m = mass,

· c = the speed of light in a vacuum.

This mass–energy equivalence formula is very useful in our IT industry also, especially when Human Resource Management comes into the picture. But how? Let me explain.

There are two terms in the industry for any particular human resource which clearly defines the interest of that particular one in his/her job.

1. Participation which means physical presence only.
2. Involvement which means Physical + Mental presence + commitment + Pride.

I have seen some of the resources who are working only in a participation mode. That means, they are not doing their work without commitment and pride. These resources are overhead in any organization and should be kicked off as early as possible.

Second category, Involvement. People work with a great enthusiasm and pride that falls in this category. They rise with a speed and always appreciated by the management.

So the physics is related to Human Resource Management as follows:

E = mc ²

Where

• E = Effectiveness
• m = motivation
• c = commitment

This means that a person can be effective only if he is motivated and his commitment level is very high.

Now the question is how E (i.e. effectiveness) can be improved? Now as per the equation, the answer is very simple. Motivation with a lot of commitment will improve it. But there are some good practices to improve E in a better way. Let us point out those practices:

1. Practice 1: One should communicate about needs.
2. Practice 2: Encourage Healthy Conflict.
3. Practice 3: Be Fully Present.
4. Practice 4: Build Trust with Every Action.
5. Practice 5: Use Technology to Build Relationships.

-- Sanat Sharma

Cost Cutting or Cost Balancing

Scenario -1.

I joined IT industry in the year 2001 as a Testing Engineer in one of the middle size US Company. My salary was INR …. and I was satisfied with it. Besides my salary, I have other facilities also like free lunch, anytime pick and drop facility, 5 days working, Medical insurance etc.

Gradually I started rising in my carrier and currently my salary is INR …. with no free lunch, no free pick and drop facility.

Scenario - 2.

One of my friends started his professional carrier in non-IT industry in the same year 2001. His salary was half of the salary that I was drawing at that time with no free lunch, no pick and drop facility and 6 days working. And still after 7+ years, his salary is half the salary of mine.

These two scenarios are same in some ways and totally different in other ways. How? Let me explain.

IT industry started rising everywhere in the world with a great Bang. Great salaries, ultimate facilities, comfortable infrastructure, and lots and lots of things. But whatever goes up in the sky will have to come back to earth. This is a real fact and same thing happened with the IT industry also.

IT industry has started controlling their expenditure. Beside IT, almost all the industries have not provided any add on facilities (like free lunch, free cab) from starting. But IT guys are used to of it. As far as salary is concern, we all know the gap in between the IT industry and other industry.

I was attending a session in a seminar where I came to know the view points of the non-IT guys about us. They simply said that

"an IT guy started his carrier with a salary that is of a non-IT person having around 7-8 years of experience. All the IT professionals have 5 days a week and non-IT guys work for 6 days a week. As far as other facilities are concern, IT industry is far better than the non-IT."

I was surprised to see the muscles of their faces (non-IT guys) full of tensions and jealous when they were discussing this.

From that day onwards, I am thinking that we, as an IT guys, are never satisfied with our salary and perks. And if our companies try to reduce the expenditures on us, like paid lunch, no free cab, we always said that there is a cost cutting in IT. Recently, my cousin sister, who is also in IT industry, came to my house and said that Cost Cutting is going on everywhere in IT.

Now the question is “Is this a cost cutting or a Cost balancing?”

-- Sanat Sharma

Group Intelligence

Recently I was part of a meeting with a highly skilled, experienced and designated people of an organization. We started discussion with a very positive attitude. All were putting their individual thought process about the subject in an excellent way including myself. Gradually the meeting started heading towards nowhere. It all seems that each and every individual on that room was trying to convince his/her thoughts to the other without even thinking about what the other person is trying to say. Since all the participants were from top management and few of them were from middle management, most of the messy statements were passed by the top management band. I was also from the middle management group. I thought to keep my mouth shut and only observed how a meeting, which was planned for brainstorming, has converted into blame storming. This was a meeting where minutes were kept and hours were lost.

I am not saying that all the top management persons in that meeting were responsible for that meeting failure or they have no sense of business. And I am dam sure that each person has a capability to handle all the positive and negative views about the subject. The only issue with those guys was that they were not trying to understand what the other person is trying to say. Also every person was trying to convince the other that he has the right thoughts about the subject.

I must say here that each individual in that meeting have a great intelligence but there was no group intelligence in that team. This is a fact that if each individual has good intelligence in a group, there is a less chance of good group intelligence in that group. Each one has difference of opinion.

In an ideal scenario, the below written equation should be true.

Group Intelligence > Sum of Individual Intelligence

I.e. Group intelligence should be greater than the sum of its parts. But this can happen only when each individual is having a different mindset and everyone brings a unique thought about the subject. Listening and convincing characteristics are also required.

All the experts have full rights to have a difference of opinion but this can be resolved in a more graceful and amicable way with humility. All the experts should go for cooperation, not confrontation. Solo intelligence is OK, but the group intelligence is much richer.

-- Sanat Sharma