About 140 odd English medium schools in five metros were surveyed. 30,000 odd students from classes 4,6 and 8 were asked questions to find how much they understood the concepts in mathematics, science and English.
Not surprisingly, students fared poorly in all these questions. They could answer the questions based on their recall. Anything asked differently than in the textbook was not answered. This clearly demonstrates the difference between learning something by rote learning and understanding something.
With the advent of objective method of questioning so prevalent in today's secondary and higher secondary exams, students get extraordinary marks. But they also belie the underlying truth that the student may not have 'understood' the concepts, because that is not tested by these exams.
It is here, where parents can perhaps play a bigger role. They can help their kids 'apply' their knowledge in day-to-day matters. For instance, a kid of 5 can count from 1 to 10, but does not understand the concept of '2' or '5' until you tell him to divide 6 chocolates between him and his friend. That is where your kid understand the 'meaning of numbers'.
When students learn to understand mathematics, they learn it to apply their knowledge with real life. They understand that what they are learning has direct relevance in their lives, and therefore start seeking it. Once the students get this linkage right, they really become 'educated' and 'smart'. Or they may just remain as intellectuals.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Is MBA meant for becoming a manager?
B Muthuraman, Managing Director of Tata Steel, has this to say about MBA, "My views on the subject are a bit radical. A typical MBA programme, as taught in B-schools, is focused on imparting knowledge about subjects like marketing, finance, organisation behaviour, operations etc. In my view, knowledge about these subjects contribute to only 20 per cent of what makes a good manager; 80 per cent of good management is based on what I call the behavioural traits of a person – it is the mindset and attitudinal make up of a person that makes him or her a successful executive and leader." Mr Muthuraman has captured thoughts of many managers and executives succintly in this statement.
This statement is however partially true. There are two implicit assumptions in this comment. One, becoming a manager is about developing the behavioural traits of a person. Two, 80% of the knowledge taught in MBA is not useful.
The first assumption is completely valid. Becoming a effective manager is about developing the behavioural traits, and no business school, howesover good it may be, can help you develop those traits. It cannot 'simulate' the real-life situations a manager faces in an organisation. Being a manager is how you respond 'on-line' to the situations in an organisation, not analysing and responding after the 'off-line' analysis of the situation. A MBA can help you develop good analytical skills which are highly useful for financial analysts, management researchers and other similar professions.
The second assumption is however invalid. When a MBA learns the different subjects of marketing,finance and operations, he learns the 'interlinkages' of these elements and how they impact the total organisational topline or bottomline. If he is thorough enough, a MBA learns that pursuing a visible lagging metrics like 'profitability' actually depends on the enabling leading measures like 'customer satisfaction' and 'defect percentage' although the lag time between the two metrics may be quite large.
More importantly, through learning these 80% of subjects, a MBA learns to use 'active sensemaking' of organisational situations instead of relying on 'passive sensemaking'. Because of this, he does not fall prey to the normal intelligent looking explanations of low turnover and high attrition. Neither is he impressed with the impressive 'figures' of high customer acquisition, because he knows figures can be maneovered quite easily. Instead of accepting facile explanations of situations, he learns to diagnose and detect the right elements behind a situation.
Like an engineer who uses his 'knowledge' of interlinkages of natural elements to detect a root cause, a MBA uses his knowledge of interlinkages of man-made and natural elements to detect the right leverages. When an engineer, in a specific job, is unable to use more than 10% of what he learnt in engineering, we appreciate that rest of the knowledge indirectly contributes to his conclusions. In the same way, application of MBA knowledge in a job may be less than 20%, but it is still relevant indirectly because a MBA is looking at an 'organisational whole'.
And if a MBA synthesises his knowledge and experience ( which like engineers forms a miniscule population), he can deploy it to design the soft architecture of the organisation;which is a hallmark of a good leader. If a gifted leader takes this 20 years to achieve this, a not-so-gifted MBA can achieve it in lesser time. This is what education offers, i think.
This statement is however partially true. There are two implicit assumptions in this comment. One, becoming a manager is about developing the behavioural traits of a person. Two, 80% of the knowledge taught in MBA is not useful.
The first assumption is completely valid. Becoming a effective manager is about developing the behavioural traits, and no business school, howesover good it may be, can help you develop those traits. It cannot 'simulate' the real-life situations a manager faces in an organisation. Being a manager is how you respond 'on-line' to the situations in an organisation, not analysing and responding after the 'off-line' analysis of the situation. A MBA can help you develop good analytical skills which are highly useful for financial analysts, management researchers and other similar professions.
The second assumption is however invalid. When a MBA learns the different subjects of marketing,finance and operations, he learns the 'interlinkages' of these elements and how they impact the total organisational topline or bottomline. If he is thorough enough, a MBA learns that pursuing a visible lagging metrics like 'profitability' actually depends on the enabling leading measures like 'customer satisfaction' and 'defect percentage' although the lag time between the two metrics may be quite large.
More importantly, through learning these 80% of subjects, a MBA learns to use 'active sensemaking' of organisational situations instead of relying on 'passive sensemaking'. Because of this, he does not fall prey to the normal intelligent looking explanations of low turnover and high attrition. Neither is he impressed with the impressive 'figures' of high customer acquisition, because he knows figures can be maneovered quite easily. Instead of accepting facile explanations of situations, he learns to diagnose and detect the right elements behind a situation.
Like an engineer who uses his 'knowledge' of interlinkages of natural elements to detect a root cause, a MBA uses his knowledge of interlinkages of man-made and natural elements to detect the right leverages. When an engineer, in a specific job, is unable to use more than 10% of what he learnt in engineering, we appreciate that rest of the knowledge indirectly contributes to his conclusions. In the same way, application of MBA knowledge in a job may be less than 20%, but it is still relevant indirectly because a MBA is looking at an 'organisational whole'.
And if a MBA synthesises his knowledge and experience ( which like engineers forms a miniscule population), he can deploy it to design the soft architecture of the organisation;which is a hallmark of a good leader. If a gifted leader takes this 20 years to achieve this, a not-so-gifted MBA can achieve it in lesser time. This is what education offers, i think.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Three core challenges of developing a child
The first challenge is that development cannot be ordered, it can only be enabled. You can 'order' your kid to be neat and tidy, but you cannot 'make it happen'. The only way you can make that happen is by 'enabling' it. Many parents forget this basic axiom of development in their kind hearted urgency of wanting their children to be the best. They keep on 'ordering' so many things that their 'orders' lose the sting. Children become experts in hearing it without doing anything.
But the second challenge is even more stiffer. Only a parent can understand what the child will need in the future, because they have a better idea of what a kid will go through and encounter. They have travelled the same path. For instance, a parent knows that not being able to share toys with friends will breed selfishness, or the habit of playing too much can distract children from studying. Many parents miss this challenge because they ignore the context of the child's situation. They forget children can negotiate the blocks when they cross the bridge, and that they were as 'selfish' as their children when they were young.
But the difficult challenge is the third one. Parents may know that sitting infront of a TV can retard the development of 'interaction skill', or the child's habit of 'stress management' is making him perform poorly in exams. Understanding what the child needs is however one half the job; the difficult part is to 'enable' the child see it and alter the behaviour accordingly. A child can neither understand what he needs in the future nor can appreciate the 'logic' of why he or she needs. How does a parent 'enable' the kid to change the behaviour in such a situation - is the toughest challenge. It is the challenge of living in the present, but preparing for the future.
We shall see how parents negotiate these three challenges of development in the ensuing days. Surprisingly, these same three challenges are also faced by a manager while developing his/her employees.Therefore, if you learn how to negotiate these three challenges, you will also benefit in your job.
But the second challenge is even more stiffer. Only a parent can understand what the child will need in the future, because they have a better idea of what a kid will go through and encounter. They have travelled the same path. For instance, a parent knows that not being able to share toys with friends will breed selfishness, or the habit of playing too much can distract children from studying. Many parents miss this challenge because they ignore the context of the child's situation. They forget children can negotiate the blocks when they cross the bridge, and that they were as 'selfish' as their children when they were young.
But the difficult challenge is the third one. Parents may know that sitting infront of a TV can retard the development of 'interaction skill', or the child's habit of 'stress management' is making him perform poorly in exams. Understanding what the child needs is however one half the job; the difficult part is to 'enable' the child see it and alter the behaviour accordingly. A child can neither understand what he needs in the future nor can appreciate the 'logic' of why he or she needs. How does a parent 'enable' the kid to change the behaviour in such a situation - is the toughest challenge. It is the challenge of living in the present, but preparing for the future.
We shall see how parents negotiate these three challenges of development in the ensuing days. Surprisingly, these same three challenges are also faced by a manager while developing his/her employees.Therefore, if you learn how to negotiate these three challenges, you will also benefit in your job.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
What to do after MBA?
I went to a MBA college in Delhi last month for a talk on my book " The five great myths of career building", published by Macmillan.
Most of the student's questions were about 'which job to take' after passing or what branch to specialise after the first year'.
This question is like trying to choose a chocolate to eat 'without tasting the chocolate'. Students neither have enough information about themselves nor have enough information about the jobs and the market to make the right choices. Static data about the latter can at least be collected, such as the difference between marketing job and sales job, or a difference between working for a share broking firm and a bank.
But very often this data is more confusing than revealing. For instance, one of the student ( let us call him Ashank) wanted to chose between two jobs: pre-sales job in a telecom division of a company visavis a sales job in a government division of the same company. His friends and conventional views suggested that 'telecom' is the domain to work in.
We sat and understood what Ashank's background is, what he has done well in the past and what objectives he currently wants to achieve from his jobs ( to get enough self information about him). Next we understood the information about the choices: what a job of pre-sales comprise vis-a-vis sales job, what lock-in exists in the two jobs in case the objectives change, what difficulties will he encounter in either of the jobs. Only after going through the both aspects of choices : self information and information about jobs was he in a position to 'commit' to one path.
More often than not it is not the decision that matters; what matters is the ability to commit to a path. That ability to commit to a path depends on what each path entails, what each path offers and what each path does not offer. Commitment is above all the ability to stick to the 'path' irrespective of the difficulties one will encounter on that path.
It is the 'process' of making a decision that helps one in making the necessary commitment. The process does not help in taking a 'right' decision, because such decisions cannot be evaluated as right or wrong. Instead the process helps in surfacing the hidden 'biases', the underlying beliefs, and uncover the blocks in one's commitment. In other words, the quality of the decision is determined by the 'process' one goes through, and not by someone guiding this way or that way.
Most of the student's questions were about 'which job to take' after passing or what branch to specialise after the first year'.
This question is like trying to choose a chocolate to eat 'without tasting the chocolate'. Students neither have enough information about themselves nor have enough information about the jobs and the market to make the right choices. Static data about the latter can at least be collected, such as the difference between marketing job and sales job, or a difference between working for a share broking firm and a bank.
But very often this data is more confusing than revealing. For instance, one of the student ( let us call him Ashank) wanted to chose between two jobs: pre-sales job in a telecom division of a company visavis a sales job in a government division of the same company. His friends and conventional views suggested that 'telecom' is the domain to work in.
We sat and understood what Ashank's background is, what he has done well in the past and what objectives he currently wants to achieve from his jobs ( to get enough self information about him). Next we understood the information about the choices: what a job of pre-sales comprise vis-a-vis sales job, what lock-in exists in the two jobs in case the objectives change, what difficulties will he encounter in either of the jobs. Only after going through the both aspects of choices : self information and information about jobs was he in a position to 'commit' to one path.
More often than not it is not the decision that matters; what matters is the ability to commit to a path. That ability to commit to a path depends on what each path entails, what each path offers and what each path does not offer. Commitment is above all the ability to stick to the 'path' irrespective of the difficulties one will encounter on that path.
It is the 'process' of making a decision that helps one in making the necessary commitment. The process does not help in taking a 'right' decision, because such decisions cannot be evaluated as right or wrong. Instead the process helps in surfacing the hidden 'biases', the underlying beliefs, and uncover the blocks in one's commitment. In other words, the quality of the decision is determined by the 'process' one goes through, and not by someone guiding this way or that way.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
First book on career building framework
The first step for on working out the modalities of career planning for students has been taken. Macmillan has released the book in India on 11 May 2007. The book's title is "The five great myths of career building ( and how successful careerists debunk them)". The book should be available at the retail shelf, throughout India, after 26 May.
Currently the book details can be seen on the following link http://www.macmillanindia.com/book-details.asp?bookid=3067&from=gr&broadid=47&detailedid=95
You can also order the book on the website. Macmillan will deliver you the book without any additional charges.
With this book published, we can take the next step.
Looking forward to your comments.
Currently the book details can be seen on the following link http://www.macmillanindia.com/book-details.asp?bookid=3067&from=gr&broadid=47&detailedid=95
You can also order the book on the website. Macmillan will deliver you the book without any additional charges.
With this book published, we can take the next step.
Looking forward to your comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)