Sunday, April 12, 2020
Perils of hero worship in today's day and age
Imagine regular Rahul with a regular Role- 9-5 job at a technology company, comes back home to play tennis ball cricket with his 2 kids and friends, enjoying the game and being part of a cheerful crowd in his apartment complex. He is environmentally conscious, careful with water and plastic, and using public transport as much as possible. During the weekend, he participates in 2-3 hour discussions with Rotary club on sundry, small improvement projects - how to how to make the immediate colony greener (barely 1 square kilometer), and some charitable causes nearby. He also visits nearby parks with his wife and kids, where he goes for long walks and occasional boating on the lake. At the tech company, Rahul is part of an important project to make a software to enable Virtual 3D Holograms (like in Star Wars) - to make global virtual meetings more effective. Now make a country of 1 million Rahuls, and don't you have a happy and prosperous country?
Will there be a book written about Rahul? Never. He's no CEO, he's just a middling mid-level manager. Where is the drama? Regular, predictable life, nothing seemingly remarkable. No autobiography or movie about him, with a bombastic title - "Story of a Stud" (made that up), "Losing my virginity" (real), "Mah lyf mah rulez" (made that up). However, he's happy, and he's part of a decent bunch of people at work, and 1 Mn versions of him are working cohesively are taking the country towards sustainable prosperity.
My point is to warn against idolising 'heroes' before deep scrutiny. Today, I think there is a massive rise in non-fiction 'hero-worship' content. This is probably due to excellent data recording over the past 30-40 years such as digital storage and the powerful media. Globalization, and reach of the media via streaming and social, is magnifying the power of spreading these stories. Further, there is increasing scrutiny of factors behind world class performance, with books like Outliers offering a formula based on some individual successes. Note that I myself have consumed a lot of hero-worship content, and therefore, all my points below are not just sermonizing to the read but to myself, too.
There are three main issues I see that should lead one to be careful when worshipping heroes that modern media and society throw up. One, is Survivorship bias. Second, is the story that is told and the story that is not told. Last, is happiness quotient of their own selves.
Survivorship bias- classic fallacy- the very mix of traits that supposedly explained the success of this guy, could have led 99 people to failure, but we will not hear of those stories- we will hear only of this 1 guy. Therefore, adopting his traits would lead us towards a 99% chance of 'failure', however we define it. There's the standard finance test; in which there's 1000 people who randomly predict that the market in the year will go Up or Down. After 10 years, there will be 1 guy out of 1024 who predicted the market exactly (Up, Down, Up, Up, Up, Up, Down, Down, Down, Up) and Wall Street Investor will run a cover story on this guy and talk about various habits of his such as drinking Ragi Malt at 11 PM contributed to his stunning success. And completely ignore the 1023 others. All media, be it print or streaming, is built on stories; and humans love stories; and therefore temptation must be great to build a cover story on this 1-guy who got the call right for 10 consecutive years- what are his habits, beliefs, philosophies, and favorite coffee flavor.
Next is that there's the untold story behind the told story- success was only possible because of underhand or unsaid means not mentioned in the book or movie. I call this the Autobiography fallacy, because one might tend to avoid murky secrets or perhaps even suspected elements of luck in telling their story to the wider world, in order to not destroy one's own legacy. Elizabeth Holmes, after the success of Theranos which did blood tests on just a pin prick of blood, was the darling of media and was hailed as hero for women the world over. Netflix would have been close to releasing a mini series on her success and her methods the world over. I am sure girls in Silicon Valley copied her deep voice, her dressing, and her hairstyle, her ways. However, 3 years later, her world collapsed and her company and she was indicted of massive fraud (book review of Bad blood on this blog is here ) . Now Netflix would have quickly done an about-turn and released the series about the shocking fraud. Movie's under process - Bad Blood IMDB link is here . Further, as pointed out in Outliers, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had immense lucky breaks - getting unprecedented access to a university computer at a young age- that gave them a huge early leap over others. No one knew about this, and for all their amazing traits mentioned in movies and biographies and copied by many, this lucky break might have been the most important reason. Their success therefore might have been despite these traits, due to their lucky early break, and not because of these traits. Further, there are numerous famous dubious stands which Steve Jobs has taken, which his biographer has not mentioned. One of which is- when he stole Mac's OS from Xerox, he said in 1996 "we have been shameless about stealing great ideas" (sic); but after Google launches Android, he said he would do Thermonuclear war on Android copying iOS (2 minute link here ). Also linked to this point is the fact that the company that these 'heroes' build, such as Nike or Apple, survive during the date of publishing of autobiography and said heroes hold a lot of stock of the company in their wealth. Therefore, there is no way that Phil Knight or Steve Jobs will reveal anything that will materially lower the company's share price.
Lastly, there's Van Gogh- VVG is obviously an immense professional success- his works have held the world in their thrall for 200+ years. I myself have dazzled by his works in the Van Gogh museum, a book on him and his paintings adorns my coffee table, and there's a review of Starry Night in this very blog right here ) There's also an analysis in the book Range about how the fact that he was unsuccessful in various vocations and those repeated quick failures 'trial and error' approach led him to hit upon big success in painting. However, the fact is, he was clinically depressed, realized that his paintings were a big hit only for the last 2 odd years, shot himself to kill, died a painful and lonely death, at the age of 35 odd. There's no posthumous joy from all the global adulation he is receiving till date. Will you be ok with this deal? Another fairly famous from the annals of biographies is Agassi's bio 'Open' - on how he absolutely hated Tennis and was very insecure for a very long time.
In conclusion, I am not saying- do not learn from heroes or do not annoint heroes. I will continue to read biographies and inspiring stories. How does one guard against this? Some thoughts follow, and they apply to me as much as to you. Firstly, better to wait for a bit before quickly anointing someone as a hero, because the closely guarded dark secrets behind the success might come out soon. Secondly, define one's own framework for personal success based on our starting position and our priorities. Thirdly, filter out survivorship bias and search carefully if there's some critical detail missing in the story and only then pick up traits or stories. More the data around it all, the better. I am reminded about how I went back to IIM B recently for a run, and I was speaking to a Professor Saurav Mukherjee about senior alum returning to campus and giving talks. He was skeptical and said that in such cases, people only talk about 'war stories', which he wanted to avoid, and that he wanted more of cases, with their data and rigour. War stories would probably be highly susceptible to Survivorship bias and Autobiography fallacy. Lastly, massive change and impact can be achieved by a group of 'normal' people with no superhuman powers, who work closely together in spirit of community and bonhomie. So instead of solely focusing on being a hero all by yourself like all the heroes in the book, one could perhaps also spend time on increasing co ordination and cohesion with community around.
Edit on Oct 18 2020: Extract from "The Four" - a masterly read in the tech-firm-bashing genre, by wise and got-my-hands-dirty-not-just-a-phD prof, Scott Galloway: "There are few better examples of what Pope Francis refers to as in unhealthy "idolatry of money" than our obsession with Steve Jobs. It is conventional wisdom that Steve Jobs put a "dent in the universe". No, he didn't. Steve Jobs, in my view, spat on the universe. People who get up every morning, get their kids dressed, get them to school, and have an irrational passion for their kids' well-being, dent the universe. The world needs more homes with engaged parents, not a better f*ing phone" While this paragraph is somewhat reductive in itself, and I feel Apple has done more than create just a phone, I do see the point and it echoes the theme of the post.
Will there be a book written about Rahul? Never. He's no CEO, he's just a middling mid-level manager. Where is the drama? Regular, predictable life, nothing seemingly remarkable. No autobiography or movie about him, with a bombastic title - "Story of a Stud" (made that up), "Losing my virginity" (real), "Mah lyf mah rulez" (made that up). However, he's happy, and he's part of a decent bunch of people at work, and 1 Mn versions of him are working cohesively are taking the country towards sustainable prosperity.
My point is to warn against idolising 'heroes' before deep scrutiny. Today, I think there is a massive rise in non-fiction 'hero-worship' content. This is probably due to excellent data recording over the past 30-40 years such as digital storage and the powerful media. Globalization, and reach of the media via streaming and social, is magnifying the power of spreading these stories. Further, there is increasing scrutiny of factors behind world class performance, with books like Outliers offering a formula based on some individual successes. Note that I myself have consumed a lot of hero-worship content, and therefore, all my points below are not just sermonizing to the read but to myself, too.
There are three main issues I see that should lead one to be careful when worshipping heroes that modern media and society throw up. One, is Survivorship bias. Second, is the story that is told and the story that is not told. Last, is happiness quotient of their own selves.
Survivorship bias- classic fallacy- the very mix of traits that supposedly explained the success of this guy, could have led 99 people to failure, but we will not hear of those stories- we will hear only of this 1 guy. Therefore, adopting his traits would lead us towards a 99% chance of 'failure', however we define it. There's the standard finance test; in which there's 1000 people who randomly predict that the market in the year will go Up or Down. After 10 years, there will be 1 guy out of 1024 who predicted the market exactly (Up, Down, Up, Up, Up, Up, Down, Down, Down, Up) and Wall Street Investor will run a cover story on this guy and talk about various habits of his such as drinking Ragi Malt at 11 PM contributed to his stunning success. And completely ignore the 1023 others. All media, be it print or streaming, is built on stories; and humans love stories; and therefore temptation must be great to build a cover story on this 1-guy who got the call right for 10 consecutive years- what are his habits, beliefs, philosophies, and favorite coffee flavor.
Next is that there's the untold story behind the told story- success was only possible because of underhand or unsaid means not mentioned in the book or movie. I call this the Autobiography fallacy, because one might tend to avoid murky secrets or perhaps even suspected elements of luck in telling their story to the wider world, in order to not destroy one's own legacy. Elizabeth Holmes, after the success of Theranos which did blood tests on just a pin prick of blood, was the darling of media and was hailed as hero for women the world over. Netflix would have been close to releasing a mini series on her success and her methods the world over. I am sure girls in Silicon Valley copied her deep voice, her dressing, and her hairstyle, her ways. However, 3 years later, her world collapsed and her company and she was indicted of massive fraud (book review of Bad blood on this blog is here ) . Now Netflix would have quickly done an about-turn and released the series about the shocking fraud. Movie's under process - Bad Blood IMDB link is here . Further, as pointed out in Outliers, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had immense lucky breaks - getting unprecedented access to a university computer at a young age- that gave them a huge early leap over others. No one knew about this, and for all their amazing traits mentioned in movies and biographies and copied by many, this lucky break might have been the most important reason. Their success therefore might have been despite these traits, due to their lucky early break, and not because of these traits. Further, there are numerous famous dubious stands which Steve Jobs has taken, which his biographer has not mentioned. One of which is- when he stole Mac's OS from Xerox, he said in 1996 "we have been shameless about stealing great ideas" (sic); but after Google launches Android, he said he would do Thermonuclear war on Android copying iOS (2 minute link here ). Also linked to this point is the fact that the company that these 'heroes' build, such as Nike or Apple, survive during the date of publishing of autobiography and said heroes hold a lot of stock of the company in their wealth. Therefore, there is no way that Phil Knight or Steve Jobs will reveal anything that will materially lower the company's share price.
Lastly, there's Van Gogh- VVG is obviously an immense professional success- his works have held the world in their thrall for 200+ years. I myself have dazzled by his works in the Van Gogh museum, a book on him and his paintings adorns my coffee table, and there's a review of Starry Night in this very blog right here ) There's also an analysis in the book Range about how the fact that he was unsuccessful in various vocations and those repeated quick failures 'trial and error' approach led him to hit upon big success in painting. However, the fact is, he was clinically depressed, realized that his paintings were a big hit only for the last 2 odd years, shot himself to kill, died a painful and lonely death, at the age of 35 odd. There's no posthumous joy from all the global adulation he is receiving till date. Will you be ok with this deal? Another fairly famous from the annals of biographies is Agassi's bio 'Open' - on how he absolutely hated Tennis and was very insecure for a very long time.
In conclusion, I am not saying- do not learn from heroes or do not annoint heroes. I will continue to read biographies and inspiring stories. How does one guard against this? Some thoughts follow, and they apply to me as much as to you. Firstly, better to wait for a bit before quickly anointing someone as a hero, because the closely guarded dark secrets behind the success might come out soon. Secondly, define one's own framework for personal success based on our starting position and our priorities. Thirdly, filter out survivorship bias and search carefully if there's some critical detail missing in the story and only then pick up traits or stories. More the data around it all, the better. I am reminded about how I went back to IIM B recently for a run, and I was speaking to a Professor Saurav Mukherjee about senior alum returning to campus and giving talks. He was skeptical and said that in such cases, people only talk about 'war stories', which he wanted to avoid, and that he wanted more of cases, with their data and rigour. War stories would probably be highly susceptible to Survivorship bias and Autobiography fallacy. Lastly, massive change and impact can be achieved by a group of 'normal' people with no superhuman powers, who work closely together in spirit of community and bonhomie. So instead of solely focusing on being a hero all by yourself like all the heroes in the book, one could perhaps also spend time on increasing co ordination and cohesion with community around.
Edit on Oct 18 2020: Extract from "The Four" - a masterly read in the tech-firm-bashing genre, by wise and got-my-hands-dirty-not-just-a-phD prof, Scott Galloway: "There are few better examples of what Pope Francis refers to as in unhealthy "idolatry of money" than our obsession with Steve Jobs. It is conventional wisdom that Steve Jobs put a "dent in the universe". No, he didn't. Steve Jobs, in my view, spat on the universe. People who get up every morning, get their kids dressed, get them to school, and have an irrational passion for their kids' well-being, dent the universe. The world needs more homes with engaged parents, not a better f*ing phone" While this paragraph is somewhat reductive in itself, and I feel Apple has done more than create just a phone, I do see the point and it echoes the theme of the post.
Labels: Books, Musings, TechTock
Sunday, April 29, 2018
Google Assistant requires some anthropomorphism- how about Jeeves?
Google Assistant in want of humanoidism
Now Google Assistant? It's just not as alluring. Because when I think Google, I think of employees, the logo, the stock price, Eric Schmidt, Sundar Pichai, his speech in IIT KGP, and what not. Just a confusing multitude of thoughts and emotions. So when I summon the assistant by the name of "Google", am I summoning this multitude of people to come to my service? I imagine a gaggle of 20,000 employees suddenly appearing in my quiet, dark bedroom to answer the query "Who owns Sunrisers Hyderabad". Whereas Siri? She glides in noiselessly, answers the query, and smoothly goes away.
Male assistants please- why not Jeeves by Hugh Laurie?
Which brings me to the next point- why Cortana and Siri? Why not a male baritone who can be like my pal from the Football team. They do have it, I think, but I'm unable to access it on my phone. Which reminds me of the ol' search engine Ask Jeeves.com. Those who read Wodehouse (like yours truly) would have had such a proclivity towards Askjeeves, over Google or Yahoo. The imagery is too compelling to resist. Similarly, Jeeves would be a great AI assistant, with a charming British accent and quirky language. They could train Jeeves AI to be based on Hugh Laurie's voice, in fact. And deserving Hugh Laurie thus finds a smart way to monetize his voice. In India, it could be Amitabh Bacchan, which would appeal to a fat lot of people. What AI voice do I want on my phone? Probably some baritone from Eastern Europe.
Edit 1, June 25: In a pleasingly self affirming co-incidence, Google has announced 10 days after this blog post that John Legend is to lend voice to Google Assistant: https://www.cnet.com/news/google-assistant-gets-six-new-voices-including-john-legend/
Edit 1, June 25: In a pleasingly self affirming co-incidence, Google has announced 10 days after this blog post that John Legend is to lend voice to Google Assistant: https://www.cnet.com/news/google-assistant-gets-six-new-voices-including-john-legend/
Labels: TechTock
Saturday, December 10, 2011
A Polarized View
Polarized sunglasses are an absolute must for Indian-city dwellers. This is applicable for all cities save for Bangalore, for the Bangalore sky is an overcast grey most of the time. Much unlike most other big Indian cities, where the sun shines in disconcertingly bright splendor for most part of the year. Delhi, Mumbai (where today the 10th of December feels like A Midsummers Night's..Nightmare), Chennai, Kolkata, Hyderabad- all scorchers. Bangalore weather is always Coming up: Coming down.
The Case
Yes, so the case for polarized sunglasses. The problem with urban landscapes, when carefully placed under a bright source of light such as our sun, is the reflected light which hits the eye of the viewer. Intense glare off the car's metal surface, glare off the puddle of water, glare of the glass building. Leaves a permanent grimace on the face of the hapless beholder. Now everything we see around of course, is thanks to reflection, one could reflect. However, that is scattering, or diffuse reflection. Specular reflection is off smooth surfaces. The cause for glare, is the specular reflection of the sun on some smooth surface hitting your eyes. Most of the objects we view are through diffuse reflection.
(Wikipedia)
Common surfaces that reflect specularly: glass, polished metal, and liquids. Glass and polished metal, we see a lot of in urban landscapes. And specular reflected light is horizontally polarized. And the lenses on polarized lenses are made of material that block out this horizontally polarized light. Voila! Glare-free vision.
So sunglasses with UV protection, good; polarized sunglasses with UV protection, great. The lenses are especially great when driving, for the glare off vehicles in front of you is eliminated. Auto rickshaw drivers and cabbies are ones who badly need polarized glasses. They are on the road all the time, and must suffer a lot from the glare off vehicles. Polarized lenses are so effective, I think, that it should be an occupational requirement, like say glasses in the chemistry lab- all auto/cab drivers need to wear polarized UV glasses. Or there should be a drive to educate them on the benefits and comforts that they bring.
A little of that human touch
An afterthought- a paragraph added 24 hours after the original post- inspired by R, here's "a little of that human touch" (a wonderful Springsteen number) : I bought Aviator-style sunglasses a month ago, and I am extremely pleased by the purchase. Thanks to P, too, for bringing up the bright, anti-bright idea in the first place, which...fired my imagination, and...loosened my purse strings. Due to my custom fit prescription lenses, the signature Ray Ban at the top corner does not exist. However, the original lenses were not polarized. So now, it's not just a Ray Ban, it's a Specular-Ray Ban.
The Case
Yes, so the case for polarized sunglasses. The problem with urban landscapes, when carefully placed under a bright source of light such as our sun, is the reflected light which hits the eye of the viewer. Intense glare off the car's metal surface, glare off the puddle of water, glare of the glass building. Leaves a permanent grimace on the face of the hapless beholder. Now everything we see around of course, is thanks to reflection, one could reflect. However, that is scattering, or diffuse reflection. Specular reflection is off smooth surfaces. The cause for glare, is the specular reflection of the sun on some smooth surface hitting your eyes. Most of the objects we view are through diffuse reflection.
(Wikipedia)
Common surfaces that reflect specularly: glass, polished metal, and liquids. Glass and polished metal, we see a lot of in urban landscapes. And specular reflected light is horizontally polarized. And the lenses on polarized lenses are made of material that block out this horizontally polarized light. Voila! Glare-free vision.
So sunglasses with UV protection, good; polarized sunglasses with UV protection, great. The lenses are especially great when driving, for the glare off vehicles in front of you is eliminated. Auto rickshaw drivers and cabbies are ones who badly need polarized glasses. They are on the road all the time, and must suffer a lot from the glare off vehicles. Polarized lenses are so effective, I think, that it should be an occupational requirement, like say glasses in the chemistry lab- all auto/cab drivers need to wear polarized UV glasses. Or there should be a drive to educate them on the benefits and comforts that they bring.
A little of that human touch
An afterthought- a paragraph added 24 hours after the original post- inspired by R, here's "a little of that human touch" (a wonderful Springsteen number) : I bought Aviator-style sunglasses a month ago, and I am extremely pleased by the purchase. Thanks to P, too, for bringing up the bright, anti-bright idea in the first place, which...fired my imagination, and...loosened my purse strings. Due to my custom fit prescription lenses, the signature Ray Ban at the top corner does not exist. However, the original lenses were not polarized. So now, it's not just a Ray Ban, it's a Specular-Ray Ban.
Labels: TechTock
Saturday, July 02, 2011
Google+ : +1
Circles are beautifully done, so my sister sits in my "family" circle and not on my "wild booze nights" circle. I know for a fact that she is not happy about this: she liked to play "spy kids". Also, the family was getting ignored in these days of social networking, at least in my case. I mean, I couldn't have written "Enjoyed delicious sambar sadam and avial at Mani's restaurant in Matunga" on my FB status without inviting a good number of sniggers and massive public backlash.
Hangout is pretty nice, people at skype must've had a heart attack. Apparently Mr. Zuckerberg has some "exciting changes" lined up, and I guess one of which will most certainly be group chatting. Does not make things any better for the Skype folks. However, there are so few people on google + right now (someone's post called it a "ghost-town") that it's difficult to get a "hangout" running. V and me tried, this morning, and we could not find anyone around.
Huddle is pretty cool, too. Not super innovation, or anything, but it was high time a common chat application like google had the group chat facility.
It's fast changing: although I installed + on my phone three days ago, my Android market is synced to "ashwin.rk@gmail.com" and not "ashwinwins@gmail.com". So I was cursing google for not enabling the Google + App to sync based on other gmail accounts. But I downloaded today's update, hoping wishing praying as the download status bar filled up, and voila! They've done it, the engineers at google. Salut!
Couple of suggestions I had, which I shot off to google in the "feedback" menu from my phone, hope they acknowledge with immense gratitude.
1. Enable different statusses for different circles. When at work, I might want to be "Available" to my work circle, "Busy" to my family circle, and "Invisible" to the ol' wild booze nights circle.
2. Decrease the likelihood of putting posts on the wrong circle. This happened to me yesterday on my mobile, when I put a post meant for "wing" on "friends". Thaknfully, no damage done. There should be an option to enable additional checks on posts to certain circles, such as family. Say a confirmation pop up.
Ideas for you: You can make your gmail user interface look very much like the Google + UI. Under Settings/Themes, choose the theme "Preview Dense". It's a much cleaner UI, and I have switched to it.
So a whole saturday I have pretty much not stirred out (Don't diss, I have plans for tomorrow), and I have logged in to facebook, not even once. I feel like logging in now, as I say this, put will do so only after midnight. I am pretty sure there is a discernible dip in traffic for Facebook last three days. After the smooth sailing so far, here's some testing times for Zuck and co.
However, given the all encompassing platform google has: maps, blog, youtube, gmail, mobile os, search, reader....the possibilites are really immense. I would think in less than a week since inception, FB must see a clear and present danger. Just for the record, I plump for plus.
Credits: The sister. Vivek Srivats for hanging out with me. Shailendra Jain for making me realize that I hadn't logged in to FB the whole day.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
First Mover Disadvantage
(Note: I wrote this in Jan, much of it except for some minor tweaks is from back then: might explain some discrepancies you may come across)
I've heard the phrase "first mover advantage" time and again. Like most phrases/idioms, looking at the exact opposite also makes sense many-a-time. Maybe even more than the original one. Anyhow, these contrary phrases sure are sensational in nature. Case-in-point:"Count your chicken before they hatch". (Or the title which contributed in a way to getting you this far into this mire. Yeah, when it comes to luring people to my blog, I am nothing but just another Arindham Chaudhari and the blog is not different from those full page IIPM ads. I wear black colored thick-rimmed glasses, too. Ponytail is work in progress. Will add a picture of me sporting a wide grin to my blog when the pony is ready to go. To cantor, gallop. Won't be long, hold your horses.) I am sure there must be many, many more management books piggybacking on this theme (can you?). These idioms and phrases, they have the tendency to generalise, due to which it is so very easy to pick holes in the argument they are putting forth. For example, I once came across this: If actions speak louder than words, then why is the pen mightier than the sword. Then, an idle mind is a devil's workshop. Well, the best breeding ground for an outrageously creative idea may be an idle mind. Not a mind that is highly preoccupied by, say, business development presentations. Or client meetings. I am sure you can think up a couple yourself, and then please yourself by creating an argument for the counter. To warm-up, let me throw one at you: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Scroll down for the correct answer. If you have other phrase-contrary phrase pairs, please get back to us, and we have attractive prizes lined up for you. Or maybe not, for after all, "The reward of a thing well done is to have done it".
I've heard the phrase "first mover advantage" time and again. Like most phrases/idioms, looking at the exact opposite also makes sense many-a-time. Maybe even more than the original one. Anyhow, these contrary phrases sure are sensational in nature. Case-in-point:"Count your chicken before they hatch". (Or the title which contributed in a way to getting you this far into this mire. Yeah, when it comes to luring people to my blog, I am nothing but just another Arindham Chaudhari and the blog is not different from those full page IIPM ads. I wear black colored thick-rimmed glasses, too. Ponytail is work in progress. Will add a picture of me sporting a wide grin to my blog when the pony is ready to go. To cantor, gallop. Won't be long, hold your horses.) I am sure there must be many, many more management books piggybacking on this theme (can you?). These idioms and phrases, they have the tendency to generalise, due to which it is so very easy to pick holes in the argument they are putting forth. For example, I once came across this: If actions speak louder than words, then why is the pen mightier than the sword. Then, an idle mind is a devil's workshop. Well, the best breeding ground for an outrageously creative idea may be an idle mind. Not a mind that is highly preoccupied by, say, business development presentations. Or client meetings. I am sure you can think up a couple yourself, and then please yourself by creating an argument for the counter. To warm-up, let me throw one at you: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Scroll down for the correct answer. If you have other phrase-contrary phrase pairs, please get back to us, and we have attractive prizes lined up for you. Or maybe not, for after all, "The reward of a thing well done is to have done it".
So coming to first-mover-advantage, yeah, you know where I am going. There is always going to be a huge first-mover-disadvantage before ever getting to the point when you start realizing the first-mover-advantage. In the long run the first-mover-advantage may play out, but in the short term one has to acknowledge the first-mover-disadvantage too, and give it some standing in the highly competitive and dynamic world of corporate jargon. After all, nothing is easier than Copy-pasting, that's what the second-mover can do. On that line, even more attractive is the third-mover advantage. That's a series of management books which could be penned by somebody, let's say Mr. Arindham Chaudari as he is already pottering about in this post. First Mover Disadvantage. Sequel: Second mover Advantage. Then, Third Mover Advantage. Ad infinitum/nauseam.
After all the beating around the bush, let me come to the point: how I have seen the first mover disadvantage play out in my life.
1. Couple of years back I bought my Nokia N95 for a bomb, and contributing to the hefty price tag was the HSDPA (3.5G) capability: my research told me the 3G launch was imminent. There was a cheaper SonyEricsson UTMS (3G) option available but then the HSDPA tilted the scales in N95's favor (despite the wad of notes on the pan containing the SE). Of course, there were so many more cheaper phones, which those not keyed in to FMA were happy with. Two years hence, where is 3G in Mumbai? Not yet around! (This reminds me of an article I read in Hindu about whether we are missing the technology bus in India in a big way: 3G was launched in Japan 10 years ago.) So, among all phone-buyers at that time, I wanted to be the first to move into 3.5G phone ownership so I could reap the benefits of FMA by browsing away to glory while others less aware peer sideways in envy: on the bus, in the train etc. But it was not to be. I discarded my phone in Nov-2010, before 3G services saw the light of day. (And the slew of exciting 3G ads hit the air. Vodafone's 3G super hero, the Abhishek Bachans triplets...)
2. After much research and undertaking much logistical trouble, I bought the Barnes and Nobel Nook e-book reader for $259 in Jun-2010. I first bought the Sony reader for $189, found it crappy, went to a store and got it exchanged for a Nook. FMA: let me buy a Nook and enjoy reading digital content for years before others adopt it. And save some dough in the process: get those pdfs online. Well, a week after I bought it, Amazon slashes the rate of the Kindle, launches a non-3G wi-fi only version (which is what I would have wanted) for $129. There, FMA sure did save me some dough.
Anyhow, in one more attempt to finally exercise the FMA, I have now bought the HTC Desire Z. It is not yet available in any E-Zone/Chroma and I did some hard work: procured it from the HTC dealer in Mumbai (that's some first-moving, baby). Android 3.2, mega-screen, slide out QWERTY, all that jazz. And now, when finally 3G arrives in Mumbai, I hope to stylishly slide out my keyboard and type " I hereby finally exercise the first mover advantage". Or something like that.
Anyhow, moral of this long-winding oft-digressing tale: take quotations, maxims, aphorisms, with a pinch of salt. Invert them and see if that does that makes more sense.
Solution: A stitch in time saves nine.
Anyhow, moral of this long-winding oft-digressing tale: take quotations, maxims, aphorisms, with a pinch of salt. Invert them and see if that does that makes more sense.
Solution: A stitch in time saves nine.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
The tablet cure
My Dell Inspiron has gone kaput, some one month ago. So for the past three weeks, my personal computer has been my HTC Desire Z. And have discovered some wonderful apps in the process: Tune in Radio- just turn on the app and then I would say tune in to BBC World Service, and let it run in the background. Given how bad all the news channels on TV are today, this is a wonderful change. Then, I don't really take to carefully-aim, wait, shoot and watch -the-result -with-tense-anticipation kind of games. Like Pool and Carrom. And Angry Birds. Tank Hero is the shizz! Good 3D graphics, challenging action-packed game with great drum-beat war music. All 80 levels conquered. Since then, my pals call me General Sherman. You can, too.
Then there's the app "How to Tie your Tie", which I am sure will be invaluable some day, as I currently know naught on knots. I mean, I do not knots. What knotty word play, no?
I totally dig the QWERTY keyboard on the phone. And of course, the portability is awesome. It surely is the best android QWERTY doing the rounds.
However, the 3.7" Super-LCD screen, super though it is, is not big enough, after all. Which means I may have to purchase a new computing device. A tablet? The idea here is to purchase a tablet with a decent sized screen, then a dock so it can sit upright on my desk. Then a bluetooth keyboard. If you really want the portability, you can probably even get a foldable keyboard, but I myself don't know yet. And there, you have it- it's as good as a laptop. Once we have MS Office for Android, it is going to be just fabulous. After all, MS Office is probably the only reason why I (or you) may even want a full scale laptop. Then, now that you have the tablet, you can so easily carry it around, use it for taking notes, as an ebook reader, mobile internet, immense possibilities!
With many people thinking along these lines, I would think MS Windows is in big, big trouble. For Windows is nowhere in the Mobile OS picture- where it's all Android and iOS. So once you have an Android or iOS cellphone, you would naturally prefer to have the same OS on your tablet. It's the ecosystem. So this also means others are in big trouble- Blackberry, say. I would imagine very few would prefer a Playbook- BB cellphone pair over the innumerable Android tablet-Android cellphone pairings out there- there's one for everyone- mix and match. Or over the iPad-iPhone pairing. Not just hardware, but the App market, too, would be the clincher for Android and iOS. The key thing is, once there is a critical mass of users, the competition is totally shut-out. Just like how Windows totally killed competition because of its sheer market share. Once 50.01% had Windows, the rest had to have Windows: because their neighbor had it. Compatibility and all that- being on the ecosystem. And at that point, incrementally better quality or technology means nothing. And what could competition have that the big guy doesn't? -Incremental betterment. Unless they have a complete "game changer", they are totally shutout. Do Android and iOS have the critical mass? I would be inclined towards saying yes. In that case, I hear of the HP-Palm OS combo-why are they even trying? However good they are, wouldn't you say they are fighting a losing battle, the enemy is just too big?
Then there's the app "How to Tie your Tie", which I am sure will be invaluable some day, as I currently know naught on knots. I mean, I do not knots. What knotty word play, no?
I totally dig the QWERTY keyboard on the phone. And of course, the portability is awesome. It surely is the best android QWERTY doing the rounds.
However, the 3.7" Super-LCD screen, super though it is, is not big enough, after all. Which means I may have to purchase a new computing device. A tablet? The idea here is to purchase a tablet with a decent sized screen, then a dock so it can sit upright on my desk. Then a bluetooth keyboard. If you really want the portability, you can probably even get a foldable keyboard, but I myself don't know yet. And there, you have it- it's as good as a laptop. Once we have MS Office for Android, it is going to be just fabulous. After all, MS Office is probably the only reason why I (or you) may even want a full scale laptop. Then, now that you have the tablet, you can so easily carry it around, use it for taking notes, as an ebook reader, mobile internet, immense possibilities!
With many people thinking along these lines, I would think MS Windows is in big, big trouble. For Windows is nowhere in the Mobile OS picture- where it's all Android and iOS. So once you have an Android or iOS cellphone, you would naturally prefer to have the same OS on your tablet. It's the ecosystem. So this also means others are in big trouble- Blackberry, say. I would imagine very few would prefer a Playbook- BB cellphone pair over the innumerable Android tablet-Android cellphone pairings out there- there's one for everyone- mix and match. Or over the iPad-iPhone pairing. Not just hardware, but the App market, too, would be the clincher for Android and iOS. The key thing is, once there is a critical mass of users, the competition is totally shut-out. Just like how Windows totally killed competition because of its sheer market share. Once 50.01% had Windows, the rest had to have Windows: because their neighbor had it. Compatibility and all that- being on the ecosystem. And at that point, incrementally better quality or technology means nothing. And what could competition have that the big guy doesn't? -Incremental betterment. Unless they have a complete "game changer", they are totally shutout. Do Android and iOS have the critical mass? I would be inclined towards saying yes. In that case, I hear of the HP-Palm OS combo-why are they even trying? However good they are, wouldn't you say they are fighting a losing battle, the enemy is just too big?
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
