The Story of Four Horses

Imagine that we are to pick one of the following four horses and train it to be a world class racing horse winning most of the prestigious prizes.

Though all the horses look exactly alike they have the following characteristics.

The first horse just knows what to do and where to go. It does not need any guidance. It can sense what you want and do things accordingly. If you wish it to turn right it would do so. If you wish it to go left it would go left without your asking. All you have to do is to wish. This horse just seems to know your mind so well that little or no effort is needed to guide it.

The second horse moves in the desired direction only when you crack a whip. But the whip need not touch the skin. The sound of the cracking is enough to steer it in the desired direction.

The third horse moves in the desired direction only when the whip lightly touches the skin. A light touch is enough to set it in motion and move the horse the way you want it to move.

However, the fourth horse is extremely stubborn. It moves only when the pain of a whiplash reaches right up to its bones. Till that time it refuses to move an inch in any direction. This horse does not do anything unless it feels the pain deeply enough. 

Which horse would you care to put your money on to win races for you?

Dharma & Creative Leadership

In India, the word 'Dharma' occupies a special place. However, the meaning of this word is greatly misunderstood.

Some take it to mean religious beliefs, which it is not. Some take it to mean a 'calling' in life, which it is not. Some take it for integrity, honesty ethical values, which it is not. Some take it to stand for justice, which it is not.

The Sanskrit word, Dharma is all about empathy and wisdom. It is about looking deep into ourselves and winning the raging war that goes on inside every human mind and spirit. It is about new ways to do something in a new situation.

This is central to anything we choose to do in life. It is the starting point of Designing and Creativity. It is the end point of Thinking It is the starting point of Decision making. It is the starting point of Personal Mastery.

All great leaders in our world, now and in the past, have adhered to the path of Dharma to be successful and do good to others. Examples are countless in every field of human activity -- Krishna, Moses, Christ, Mohammad, Buddha, Gandhi, Mandela, King, Tagore, Shakespeare, Kalidas, Mother Teresa, Newton, Einstien, Bohm, Bateson... They were against rituals and established orders. They understood reality and the aspiration of their people well. They were creative. They helped people. Touched their lives and hearts. And moved them and nations or their fields of activities to ever increasing greatness.

How might the golden traits of empathy and wisdom be developed?

It might be developed through critical thinking. It might be developed through practices of problem solving or questioning meaningless rituals. It might be developed through listening to stories and developing imagination. It might be developed through the practice of achieving balance in anything we experience or choose to do.

Generally, it is best to have a bit of all four paths or ways incorporated in our daily lives to have a balanced but accelerated process of self development in empathy and wisdom. 

Without these two fluxes to envelope us we are badly stuck in life. But mastery in these would certainly help us to become Creative Leaders to lead our societies in this new century.

Creative Leadership based on Dharma is not only about the way we think, do, manage and organize our organizations and societies but also how we choose to lead our own lives in the most productive fashion that ensures joy and satisfaction in whatever we do opening the way to enjoy the expanding experience of freedom.

Unchallenged Complex Problem for past 4 years!!

Here is a complex problem. I played with this ‘live’ problem for quite sometime and challenged many to solve this problem – verbally of course. Fair to say, it remains unsolved or unchallenged for the past 4 years. This is the first time I am writing it out.

Would you love to challenge your brains on this nagging problem? Here it goes for you:

A certain factory producing goods made out of rubber decides to raise its productivity. The rubber products are made in moulds that are placed in a hydraulic press and kept there under specified conditions of temperature, pressure and time for proper curing and formation to take place. The hydraulic operated presses have one mould cavity to place one mould at a time.

The owner comes up with a simple plan to improve productivity. He decides to increase the number of mould cavities in the hydraulic press allowing him to process multiple products at the same temperature, pressure and time. So, he goes for ‘two mould cavity’ presses and quickly replaces the old presses by these two mould cavity ones.  

He then calculates the possible output if he does that. Let us say that he would get 100 products by changing from single mould cavity press to double mould cavity press.

But he is dismayed when he finds out the actual output. It is less than 50% (acceptable products) of what he expected to get. How is that? He thinks that something must be wrong. So he decides to increase the number of presses accommodating double mould cavities.

What is the result? Again less than 50% (acceptable products) of what he thought he must get.

Infuriated, he goes for ‘3 mould cavity’ presses. He then increases the number of presses to 10. And also increases the number of operators and workmen to run the operation. He backs it up by increasing the number of supervisors to look after the operation. He also increases the number of overhead cranes from one to two. 

How did that turn out?

Again less than 50% of what he calculated would be the output.

Baffled, he then thinks to improve the system and institute a system of quality culture. He also thinks of training the workers and the supervisors to do their jobs better and pay close attention to the performance of the machines and moulds and the way rubber is injected into the mould cavities -- trying to lessen the time and the apparent wastages in the system.

What happens?

The output refuses to move even a percentage point above 50%.

Can you crack this stubborn, nagging and chronic problem for the factory owner? He would be indebted. What would be the right thing for the owner to do?

 

Note: I first published this problem in Anveshan, Vol III, '11 edition (April 2011) a technical magazine of NIT Durgapur, my alumnus