Saturday, December 29, 2012
Super Crunchers
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Selling the WHEEL
Selling the WHEEL By Jeff Cox and Howard Stevens
This story is likely to leave you with a latter type of question.
Thanks for reading this far.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Reverse Innovation
Friday, May 4, 2012
Infinite in ALL directions by Freeman J Dyson
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
The Art of Choosing by Sheena Iyengar
Max Born once made a famous remark: “I think chance is a more fundamental conception than causality”. Taking that cue along after reading this book, I think “choice is a more fundamental concept than constraint!”
If you are expecting specific research insights from the author’s work, perhaps this is not the book. Most of the experiments (like Jam tasting etc.) are familiar ones. But the stories are well articulated. Her prologue about her own immigrant life with poor eye sight bordering blindness turns out to be a serious start. Her last chapter is about her marriage wherein her experience with a famous astrologer is indeed engaging. Overall, this book defies any attempt to summarize it. Still, let me persist and come up with a few points.
“We all have a buffet mentality” she firmly declares and so argues that choices are critical. (By the way, Mr. Buffet always goes for A la carte when it comes to picking stocks. J) In her view, there is an optimal level in terms of the number of choices beyond which any additional choices available is nearly of no consequence and in fact add to our woes. Decision making then, becomes more complicated than it needs to be.
She quotes Mathematician Henri Poincaré: “Invention consists in avoiding the construction of useless combinations and in constructing useful combinations. To invent is to discern, to choose”. She does propose a nice corollary based on that: “To choose is to invent”. Trouble with such a simple dictum is that it takes a Poincaré, arguably one of the best mathematicians of the century, to reject useless combinations. Nice try anyway.
“We have biases to support our biases” she asserts. It reminds me of Groucho Marx quip “Here are my principles. If you don’t like them here is another”. After all, it is essential to simplify the world around us so that we can make sense out of it and get along with life - biases are here to stay. They rapidly reduce the cognitive overhead for us. She gives interview process and other examples where biases come in the way –very insightful.
We know how much one can miss the mark predicting how other people would react given a set of circumstances. A sample story presented is refreshing since it was not a pre-designed experiment: A male student of the author was visiting India with a female friend of his, with whom he had romantic interest. However, she was not reciprocating. He decided to take the matter into his own hands. He decided that a thrill ride through Delhi in a fast and dangerous auto rickshaw was just the thing to get the blood pumping. The plan was near perfect. He waved for an auto driven by a large, loud man in a turban. He gave him the directions which led to narrow, noisy and curved streets. His friend held on tightly, her eyes wide and hair loosened by the wind. When they finally came to a stop, she stumbled out and smoothed down her clothes. “Well”, he said rather pleased with himself, “how was that?” She leaned close, looked him in the eye, and said, “Wasn’t that rickshaw driver just gorgeous?”
She talks about priming and framing with good examples. As to framing, most of us know that we rarely change the question we are asked. That is once the question is framed or given to us, we try to answer the question rather than question the question itself. As to priming, her point is worth a recap: The effectiveness of priming lays in its subtlety not its strength. It affects our choices at the margins rather than causing us to act against our strongly held beliefs. A prime may influence whether you drink Pepsi or Coke but prime alone would never make you sell your belongings and spend your life in a monastery in Himalayas.
You will think a while for some time about the “puffery” in packaged drinking water industry. Puffery means making claims that ordinary people do not take seriously. For example, “Best”, “Revolutionary”, “Latest”, “Gourmet” and other such buzzwords fall into this category. I was shocked to learn that bottled water customers pay 1000 times more per-gallon than they do for tap water. She cites few experiments where in blind tests the packaged water was no better than the humble tap water. It is clear at least in this industry, people have taken the puffery seriously.
“To appreciate the value of shade, you need hot sunlight” says one Tamil proverb. How true? You need limitations to appreciate the value of choices. Let me end with a serious observation from I-Ching:
“Unlimited possibilities are not suited to man. If they existed, his life would only dissolve in the boundless. To become strong, man’s life needs limitation ordained by duty and voluntarily accepted. The individual attains significance as a free spirit surrounding himself within the limitations and determining himself what his duty is”.
Thanks for reading this far….
Regards,
madhu
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
The Adventures of a Bystander by Peter F Drucker
Peter F Drucker (PFD) was a top dog in management and has written many books to his credit. Somehow, I chose to take a stab at his autobiography rather than any of his specific works and I was delighted by my choice.
During Drucker’ s life time, he seems to have interacted with eminent people like Sigmund Freud and Henry Luce and so on. For the commentary purposes, I would restrict myself to just one chapter. It is about his school teachers and it impressed me the most. I also liked his views on grandmother and Indian summer of innocence chapters very much. This work would not qualify for an autobiography in a strict sense since he talks about a handful of people, but the way he has mixed his observations and the environment details makes for a compelling read. If society is made of individuals and their stories, this work would constitute one good chapter.
In this chapter “Miss Elsa and Miss Sophy”, he talks about two teachers whom he adored without any reservations. In terms of handling students as well as personalities, they could not be more different – yet, very effective in their own way. As per Drucker, despite the fact they were first rate teachers, if not outstanding, they failed to impart what Drucker needed to learn – that is, writing legibly and learning a bit of craft skills.
PFD enjoys watching the teachers a lot. Let us see them through the eyes of Drucker.
Miss Elsa was the principal of the school. After three weeks, she asks Drucker about his strengths, weakness and his own rating on reading, comprehension, arithmetic and handwriting. I think it was a great approach at such an early stage of school. They agreed that he is very good in the first two and she left with minimum directions to consolidate on the two strengths. Then, as to arithmetic, he rated himself as “Poor”, but teacher remarked he is fine – except that he is very sloppy and specific techniques need to be taught to check the answers – he was making no more mistakes than many. I think such nuanced an observation comes only if you are a terrific teacher. As to handwriting she went beyond his assessment that he is “Poor” and called him a total disgrace for her class. She drew clear and detailed plans how to go about improving it.
Miss Sophy, arts teacher after observing him for a month or so asked Drucker, ”How about making a milking stool for your mother?”. Drucker responded “We don’t have any cows at home” for which she would respond that is about the only thing he could possibly make. Sadly, by the end of year the one he came up with was barely stable.
What I liked the most is, after making serious attempts to improve his handwriting and failing, Elsa called his parents to say he won’t improve in future either (she was correct) and hence recommended him for higher education school (it is called Gymnasium in Europe at that time) ahead by an year since his other skills were more than up to the mark.
Drucker in his other works insists that one can build performance based on strengths not on weakness and also that it takes lot more energy and effort to move from incompetence to mediocre than from mediocre to excellence. Now, at least we know the context.
Drucker strongly believes that students always recognize a good teacher. But, teacher is an elusive term. Some are verbal and some are non-verbal. Some are effective in large crowds, some in small groups, and some in one-on-ones only. What works for one rarely works for another first rate teacher he opines.
There are two breeds. (1) Teacher – who has a gift in his keeping. They are born. (2) Pedagogue – who programs the student for learning. It can be learnt by almost everyone. This is the most important detail I had learnt – wish I had this grasp when I was in school.
Miss Sophy had charisma, gave enlightenment, conveyed vision and was a teacher! Miss Elsa had method, gave skills, guided the learning and was a pedagogue. In either case, they are passionate and they held themselves accountable for the results. He concludes rather strongly that, “there are no poor or stupid or lazy students for a real teacher and pedagogue. There are only good teachers and poor teachers”.
Finally, my image of a teacher is one of apocryphal story – a teacher who has unerring instincts and unsurpassed effectiveness. Once there was a teacher, who was reputed to know answers to all questions. A student was determined to prove him wrong. He does a thorough job of understanding the teacher’s daily routine. He figures out that the teacher has the habit of coming out of home briefly after waking up for morning ablution. After meticulous planning, with some of his friends as witness, he waits near the teacher’s home one day very early in the morning when visibility is a bit dubious. He is holding a sober bird in a cage (basically it won’t make any noise). He also has a sharp instrument that is poisoned that would kill the bird almost instantly. His plan was near perfect and all he has to do is ask the teacher is the bird is dead or alive. If the teacher says it is alive, he can kill the bird in an instant and show him he is wrong. If he says it is dead, he would be wrong already.
Now he asks the teacher in a loud voice from a distance to ensure low visibility, “Teacher, tell me the bird in the cage is alive or dead?”
Teacher, with all his sagacity summoned responds, “My dear, the choice is yours!”
Thanks for reading this far.
Regards,
madhu
Monday, August 1, 2011
The Mythical Man-Month
Schopenhauer warned that, “Any book that is important should be reread immediately”. While I did follow his advice eventually, the gap between first read on a dog eared library book and now on a good silver jubilee edition was more than a decade and the impact is vastly different.
Author was overseeing one of the biggest ever software development undertaking in the history. Hence, the nuggets of wisdom he delivers ought to be taken seriously. But all the technologies he talks about (e.g.: Microfiche) can be found only in museums and the processes for controls are also less applicable in the current scheme of things. It goes to prove writing an enduring classic in this area is close to impossible.
| Code Base Size : Large and beyond | Quad-4 | Quad-1 |
| Code Base size : Small to Medium | Quad-3 | Quad-2 |
| Short | Long | |
| Time Horizon | ||
Lines-of-Code (LOC). Want to avoid quoting any specific language for LOC. Ball park division would be: Small = up to 500K LOC; Medium: Up to Million LOC; Large and Beyond: Greater than Million LOC (Disclaimer: Small, Medium and Large definitions are flimsy at best).
Author is essentially talking about a project that clearly qualifies for Quad-1. By the way, I could not think of any Quad-4 projects. Now days, most of the people are involved in Quad-2 and Quad-3 projects and hence the applicability of the book’s advices would have to be taken in that light. Most of the mammoth projects are already in shape (like huge new OS development etc) and hence what you would witness is using them for our end application goals.
Some books stand the test of time since it deals with basic problems. I would say only a portion this book would stand that test. Let me summarize the main points of this book with my comments (disclosure: not exhaustive).
1. Man-Month is not an interchangeable unit. That is, by putting more people you cannot reduce the time taken – if you try to add more people, it can only exacerbate the situation. (May be in the next edition, author would change the reference as person month in tune with the spirit of times).
2. Importance of documentation and communication are well stressed. While there is nothing to be gainsaid on them, proposed solutions may not suit. Yet, the concept needs to be taken to heart during execution.
3. He rightly stresses the need for conceptual integrity in product. However, in the world of rapid changes, it is difficult to come up with enduring ones. Yet one (or the core team?) would have to try. Previously, users adapted to the devices more, but now market drives the specifications and design. Hence, it is bound to be fragmented and maintaining it is going to be even more daunting. In any product, as changes start creeping into each version of the launch or upgrade, the systems start accumulating what is known as “design debt”. It starts innocuously at first and over a long period (if changes are not frequent and well done) becomes eventually overwhelming such that it would justify a total redevelopment.
4. Small time lapses eventually add up to large delays. He advises us to be very vigilant on them. I would surely agree since each one in isolation would be very negligible but collectively it can deliver a catastrophe. He quotes in the beginning of the chapter “How does a project get to be a year late?” and answers “One day at a time”. That Q&A alone would provide the snappiest summary of the message.
5. He talks in detail about the structure of the team. So long as we take them in the light of Quad-1 kind of projects, they are fine. If you are handing Quad-2 or 3 projects, most of the suggestions are too overwhelming to implement, but one can look into the spirit of it and make sure it can be accomplished in some manner. Take away would be, think thoroughly on team structures before the journey.
6. Finally, author quotes from a restaurant in New Orleans. “Good cooking takes time. If you are made to wait, it is to serve you better and to please you”. In effect, advising “courteous stubbornness” like that of chef while handling change notes or modification request or rework etc for the project. Well said, but I would be apprehensive of this point in a market driven world - should be attempted with caution.
Let us go back to Schopenhauer’s warning where we started. Now, I know at least one reason as to why he said what he said. If you don’t read the book again immediately, the contents may become outdated faster than we all wish.
Thanks for reading this far.
Regards,
madhu

