How much is too much?

I was a boy of Twelve when this incident happened. I was visiting my maternal grandparents during my summer vacation. After my lunch I went upstairs to get some air. It was an open terrace with just an overhead water tank. There was a crow sitting on it. I felt the urge (don't know why!) to feed it. After some deliberation, I finally decided to feed it with puffed rice. I ran down brought a fistful and threw towards it. The Crow initially hesitated and then started eating its food. Once in a while it cawed. To my amusement in a couple of minutes, terrace was filled with Crows. By the sound of their cawing, I guessed that they were to trying to convey, "Could you feed us as well?" I felt it was my responsibility to feed them as well. I made several trips running downstairs and upstairs and managed to finish entire puffed rice packet. To my surprise, the number of Crows seemed to increase every time I came up and there seemed to be no end to their hunger.

My Grandfather was observing all this and asked me gently, what I was up to? When I mentioned my futile effort to feed the birds, he smiled and said, "When you're trying to offer help, first assess your limits and ensure that you've some energy left for yourself and your dependents, so that, you are in a position to offer help again. You have finished all the puffed rice at home, leaving it neither for my family (which of course includes you) nor you could satisfy all the crows." He further added, "I agree that it is our responsibility to feed animals around us and help others around us but you have equal responsibility towards your family to ensure their basic needs are met."

Now that learning stayed with me till date and will forever. The other day, I was having a conversation with a friend of mine, we were discussing how certain people act selflessly and through their acts of generosity have boosted the spirit of humanity. He then mentioned that, a particular gentleman, a very rich person donated everything of his, his ancestral property and now his heirs are living in extreme poverty. There were also instances were couple of my friends mentioned that, their great / grandfathers had donated all their lands to either government / others and now because of which, they have to run everywhere to make ends meet. I have always vehemently objected to all such activities, supposedly noble causes but ludicrous according to me. The answer which I almost always got was when you do good you'll go to heaven. This is beyond any person's common sense. Even if I were wrong, a heaven does exist and all such noble men go there, how can one enjoy in heaven when all his near and dear are rotting in hell (read as poverty)? And how can God open his/her/its gates to those who failed to fulfill their responsibility?

There were a couple of arguments, saying how we were taught in childhood that, a guest is equal to god, you have to feed him well, even if you have to forgo your food. Now, what they din't teach us is, how long should we entertain such guests. If its for a night its fine. You can. What if its for a week? Will you have any energy left to earn your bread? Question that to yourself. There could be a million quotes saying, you're the power, hero, driver of your destiny etc., Truth be told, very frankly, all of us aren't heroes (could be heroes for someone) we win, we lose, our lives are still largely dependent on various external factors (unless you're Henry David Thoreau :) )

Thinking rationally, its better to invest and create opportunities to uplift people from poverty, and living a modest life than donating everything for charity, thus, starving your family and yourself. If the urge to donate still doesn't die - Keep calm and remember, Charity begins at home!

You never fail to surprise me!

"You never fail to surprise me!" this was a feedback point given to me by a friend. While he said this in a surprising tone, commenting on my work, when I reflect upon his comment, it could mean people often surprise one another with their abilities, work, attitude and sometimes foolish decisions.

This 'surprise' element comes into picture when you have set others' potential to a (imaginary) limit yourself. But should you have any such limitations? Or should you have no expectations at all? Should you look at the journey? Or should you look at the destination?

In times, when we are forced to look at our strengths and areas to improve (sigh! not weaknesses -how many can humbly accept!) and constantly be trashed with questions, "where do you see yourself in next 5 years?" or "How are you planning your next move (new job)?"; our minds are being diverted towards success or lets call it destination.

It will take extra ordinary courage for a person to say, let me try something new, let me fail, let me lose and see what I will gain. It is by looking at such courageous humans, when they succeed in their venture, one tends to get surprised because the other party just demolished their mental restrictions placed about them and their belief system. 

Robert Frost beautifully articulated the same almost a century ago in his classic, 'The Road Not Taken'.

So, should one be bothered about weaknesses? Should you place a mental restriction about others' abilities? (for whatever reason). My answer is two fold - when its about others, ignore their weaknesses. Do not attribute your limitations or weaknesses on others and feel that its their potential. True leaders sense the hidden spark within an individual, nurture it and make fire out of it. Its like sowing a seed, watering it, adding manure and help it grow into a tree. Are there any chances that the seed will not get germinated or the sapling may die? There are. But when you stand under the shade of the giant tree, you'll realize, you've nurtured the spark or the will of a tree inside the seed to grow. The journey you've made along with the tree, amazing.

When it's about you, you should focus on your weaknesses, be fully aware of them and try to overcome them constantly. One school of thought argues, focus on your strengths, work hard to improve them by ignoring weaknesses. Now, when you were a kid and wanted to learn how to ride a bicycle, you were good at walking. If you would've worked on your ability to walk or run well, you'd have become a great runner, but, if you feared falling and thereby not learnt cycling, you would've missed gaining something new. A joy. You would have missed (sometimes) painful then blissful destination of art of cycling. Look at a river, it is destined to meet sea, the moment its born, as a small water flow, on its way, if its blocked by a mountain, does it get disheartened and goes back? It slowly works its way around the mountain. Now, if there is a valley behind the mountain? It still plunges forward, transforming itself into a waterfall and continues on its course. Others?!...they stand admiring the beautiful journey with surprised and appreciative looks :)

Purpose, Life and Value

The other day, couple of friends and I were going out for lunch. We were walking on the pavement and there were couple of ants on the path. Since a kid, I was always interested in ants. This post isn't about one of the successful species of the earth but a conversation which took place.

I asked them to be watchful of the steps and not to trample / step over them. I was showered with questions, arguments and praises (pun intended). One of them said, "You eat chicken (he meant you're a non vegetarian) don't you feel bad?" Other, "Who on earth has time to watch and be mindful?"

Hmmm think about it. Do they have a point here? Human, the most busiest animal on earth, sweating hard to earn money, kill others, expanding his horizons of knowledge, doing good stuff to other HUMANS. Now where has he got the time for ants? Of what use it? Aren't they right?

No sir, they are not. I say, as long as you do not have a purpose you shouldn't take a life. Am neither a supporter of People for Ethical Treatment of Animals nor People For Eating Tasty Animals, but when you kill a hen, you have a purpose. You may want to call it for survival, necessity, part of diet etc., Good, bad or ugly park it aside, you have a purpose.

Now, you have no purpose when you stamp on / trample / kill an ant which is going about on its own course. You're wasting a life and are not giving it a chance it attain its true purpose.

Basing on the premise above, one argued, "Terrorists also have a purpose then, to kill people. So what if it's a bad one. Do you support it?" To which I replied, "Humans are part of food chain. When they kill an animal they have a purpose. They don't kill an animal after baptizing it or since a particular person of a particular religion is rearing / domesticating it. killing in the name of god or honour killing has no purpose at all. It can never be categorized as a purpose. If I am vegetarian and you aren't the purpose of your killing an animal according to me is bad since it doesn't serve my purpose of satisfying hunger and to you it is good since it serves your purpose. Terrorism has no purpose. It doesn't value life. It just takes away the purpose of life."

The third one then presented two quotes by Leo Tolstoy, "A man can live and be healthy without killing animals for food; therefore, if he eats meat, he participates in taking animal life merely for the sake of his appetite." and by David Brenner, "A vegetarian is a person who won't eat anything that can have children."  So can't you survive without eating meat?

The answer is broad. Man has evolved over a period of time and started farming much later before he started to feed himself with meat (rather raw meat). As human races evolved some became nomads, some farmers, some kings etc, What we eat determines our genetic structure. They say eating meat makes you merciless. So should a king be, merciless in a battle and strong. Aren't vegetarians strong? Could be. That's why the purpose of killing for them could be bad and good for the rest. Now imagine, you're a soldier lost in a forest, how do you survive? By eating snakes, frogs and what not. Now, if you're adamant on not killing you'll die. Do you see a purpose? In the struggle to kill a snake, he might die too. Can you blame the snake? The stronger simply survived. So as Bradley Mille said, " Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as valuable to the child, as it is to the caterpillar." So long as there is no purpose a life should never be taken away. 

PS: I donot know the impact of the conversation but they actually watched their steps on our way back home :) Not sure if its because of my nagging or they realised something. I sincerely hope its latter.

Am I chickening out? When I have to console someone?

Am composing this..as I am waiting for a bus to go to Hyderabad. I get this call from a friend carrying a bad message that one of our close friend's mom expired.

She was a friend of mine too. Just a couple of days back this friend and I were   discussing about her life long illness and thought, the sooner she passes away the better. Two days later, I get this news around 2:30 PM. I was at office. My initial reaction was, nothing. Absolutely. Calm. Slowly as the news sunk in, I went mad. I had no clue what I was doing. Asking someone out for a smoke, chatting, blabbering, cursing myself, then others. All sorts of thoughts were running in my mind. It was as if, you're drowning in a sea, gasping for air, then swimming for a while, then drowning. At some point, I din't even want to go and see him. Why? Am I scared that I wont be able to console him? Why did I ask someone to be there with me for sometime or ask them out for a smoke and later have a guilty feeling? Am I so emotionally weak or does it happen with everyone?

Then I recollected, Longaker's model of managing change, I was in the first stage, Shock! Then, I wanted to check how humans feel when someone close to them dies, According to David Gershaw, people / mourners tend to:

1. Self blame, question one self, criticise one self

2. Blame others

3. Find relief that the person expired

4. Numbness

According to Mark Pettinelli, thought, action and feeling can occur in any order. So here, emotions (negative) were empowering thoughts and actions.

According to Oral Cancer Foundation, grief has several dimensions. It may last for more than an year and slowly the mourner carries on with a radically altered experience of life.

Next time, you see a friend (mourner / one who lost a dear one) behaving this way, realise, that they'll need their time and not to force them out of it but help them to overcome it.

As a persian proverb says, "This too shall pass!"

Sources: 

http://www.strategies-for-managing-change.com/christine-longaker.html

http://www.jiskha.com/social_studies/psychology/death_emotions.html

http://cnx.org/content/m14358/latest/

http://cnx.org/content/m14334/latest/?collection=col10447/latest

http://www.oralcancerfoundation.org/emotional/patterns_of_grieving.htm

Should I kill the mosquito?

The question may sound silly. Agreed. But this was a conflict I always had since I was a kid. I happened to read 'Srimad Bhagavadgita', (holy book of Hindus) in which, Krishna (Narayana) says, "I am omnipotent and omnipresent. I am the one who creates, preserves and destroys but not you (man or nara). You must perform your duty / action and leave the results of the action to me." This should have made my life easier. Did it? Nope. This paved way to a new question, when god is everywhere how could I kill the god!?

I posed the same question to my dad, to which my old man answered, "It is not only your duty to preserve nature but also have an equal responsibility to protect your body." Hmmm this sounds reasonable I thought. I happily started killing mosquitoes. One day I happened to watch a show on television. It was about Valmiki, a sage who after being a dacoit / thief, renounces everything and goes to meditate in dense forest. Nothing moved him. Ants build mound on his body. I also saw/ read couple of other stories on the same lines. That meant people could still live in peace without actually having to harm other living beings.This again brought back the conflict. 

I would like to narrate two stories here. One. A saint and his disciple were traveling together. They saw a bus fell into the river. By the time the bus was pulled up using a crane and rescue team, every one in the bus was drowned. Disciple asks his master, "O master! you had mentioned in one of your speeches that, people who do punya (or good deeds) are closer to god. This bus must be carrying good people too. So why should they die?" To which the saint did not answer. They continued with their journey. At night they decide to rest beneath a tree. They sit down. Suddenly the disciple springs on to his feet. Something stung him. He looks around and sees ants. In an act of rage, he kills not only the ant which bit him, but also, the ants around. When he settles down. The sage smiles at him and asks his disciple, "How many ants bit you?". "One", replies the disciple. "Then why did you kill the good ants around it? You're only supposed to kill the one that harmed you." (The moral of the story is interpreted in many ways but what stuck me was the line highlighted. This made me think. Am I killing the mosquito which bit me or innocent ones too?)

Then I happened to read the second one. Its about Sri Rama Krishna Paramahamsa and his teachings. (I cannot vouch whether it s a true story or not) He had several disciples. He used to send one disciple daily to fetch condiments from a store which was across the river. One day he sent Shantananda (Known to be the most saatvik amongst the disciples). The boatman started abusing Rama Krishna Paramahamsa, to which Shantananda didn't reply and instead started weeping. When he returned to ashram, master asked his disciple (in front of several other disciples) what happened. When the disciple narrated the incident. Master gave a mouthful to his disciple and questioned him, "How could he hear someone abusing his teacher?"  Next day, he sent Vivekananda to the grocery shop. The boatman again started abusing the teacher. Vivekananda was not amongst the ones to keep quiet. He bashed the boatmen and threw him into the water. When he returned, the master asked him to narrate if something happened. Hearing what happened, (in front of several other disciples) he gave a mouthful and questioned him, what kind of a sage Vivekananda was? and commented that the disciple was unfit to be a sage with such a temperament. When Vivekananda left, other disciples asked the teacher to explain his actions. To which the master replied, "Shantananda is too soft, he should learn to use anger when needed. On the other hand, Vivekananda is temperamental, he should cool down and learn to suppress his anger. One should display emotions in right amounts at right times and should not be bogged down or tied to the events and move on. One should strive to live like a droplet on lotus leaf. Attached but yet detached."

All these din't completely answer my question till last week. I joined a philosophy class and posed the same question to my teacher. I thought the question was silly and was wasting others' time. Teacher thought otherwise. He answered it perfectly saying, one should behave according to ones nature. If you're aggressive. Understand your nature. Accept it. Love yourself. Go ahead kill the mosquito because it might harm you. If you're passive. Understand your nature. Accept it. Try to avoid killing the mosquito by applying a repellent. One should understand ones nature first. Without understanding it, if you try to imitate others it will become a source of conflict of values. Slowly with experience one attains the higher levels beyond the three gunas (qualities). That finally answered my query.

Last evening one of my classmate, Mani told me that he blogged his thoughts on the same question, "Mosquito Geeta". Please go through it. After going through his work, I thought I should elaborate why I asked that particular question and hence posting the same. So do not know if this post answers any of your questions but I got mine answered! 

I would like to thank Somayaji Manikantan to make me think and give my thoughts a shape.

I don't have a six pack...so?

Every Tom Dick and Harry wants to have a six pack these days. I mean its kind of become a craze lately. I see loads of people sweating on tread mills when I walk back home. I pity them. Why? What's wrong if one wants to sport a six pack? Nothing wrong if one wants to look skinny / slim / fit. But I don't see a point when people don't understand the importance of fat, body structure, metabolism but want to shed weight or want a six pack.

Now I have browsed through several articles to understand how fat gets built up, how it is used and when it becomes dangerous. I shall try and restrict my self to 2 paragraphs and will provide sources at the bottom so that readers who are interested can get more information.

If you're under the assumption that our ancestors used to work really hard and we aren't. Its a MYTH. In fact, we are working more than they did or at least the same. So, where is the problem? Early man used to hunt and food wasn't plenty back then. More so till the invention of pesticides. In the recent times, I had never heard about a famine in India or most countries except some nations in Africa. Countries like North Korea (1995-99) and Sudan (1998) had famines after 1990. (Amn't talking about poverty here. Am talking about availability of food and most parts of Africa is still under famine. Its an eye opener to read this wiki article  and this BBC article). We have abundant food available more than what our ancestors had. The intake is more than the expenditure. Over a period of time when energy (measured in calories) intake is more than expenditure, it gets deposited in the form of fat and further deposits can lead to obesity.

1 pound of fat stores a little more than 3500 calories. This is what helped early man to survive when there was no food. Nature has helped humans in storing fat at certain places in body. Thus helping in mating too. Fat helps you to keep yourself warm, acts like a cushion. Now there are two types of fat. Visceral and Subcutaneous. The former in excessive amounts is dangerous and is a risk to your life. So if you have more of Visceral fat burn it. But fat burns in an order too. The fat in the face gets burnt first, then arms and legs, thighs and hips then comes abdominal fat. So, its absolutely of no use if you just keep working only on abs.

Anyway am not suggesting any diet recommendations here. Point is having a small paunch is ok. As long as you're healthy don't feel bad that you don't have a six pack. Walk more often. Drink plenty of water. Reduce in take of alcohol and that will reduce the urge to binge junk food. Now you could also consider donating some money and help: Famine in East Africa How you can help

Sources:

http://www.caloriesperhour.com/tutorial_pound.php

http://www.howstuffworks.com/life/cellular-microscopic/fat-cell1.htm

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/30641.php

http://greatist.com/health/belly-fat-worst-kind/#

http://www.ieham.org/html/docs/Famine%20in%20the%20Twentieth%20Century%20Devereaux.pdf

http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html

Note: Please donate using your discretion. 

Dress well to do well...a myth!

Well how many of us throw a dirty look at a guy who wears "slippers" to office? Many. Well I was debating with my colleague the other day, "Does dressing really matter?" I do not yet have directs but he is a manager. He said ,"Yes".

I asked, "What about work? I could care less as long as the guy is wearing a dress which doesn't make others uncomfortable. Its work that we should be bothered about. Not his slippers, beard or jeans! " 

My colleague said,  "I wouldn't even consider such candidates. Work is secondary for me. He has to dress formally to office"

"What do you mean? You will ignore a candidate who is an excellent performer just because he wears floaters to office? You're in a halo effect. Wake up."

"I will. I will prefer a candidate who wears office wear over an Einstein. They are meant to work in labs, not offices."

With that we stopped the conversation. Both of us knew we will not reach to a conclusion. To my surprise most of my colleagues were supporting him.

In the field of management, which is a mixture of science and art, there is no one "right" way of doing things. But his debate got me thinking. While I fully agree that since we live in a society there are occasions where one has to dress aptly. For example, say a funeral..I don't want to see a woman attending the mourning in a bikini however sexy she is. Though am a hindu, if I were to visit a mosque, I will wear an Imama (cap). If I were conducting an interview I wouldn't mind a candidate coming in a simple trouser and shirt (presentable).

There are tons of articles, videos and papers explaining the importance of 'power dressing' and how it can build and shape your career. Possible. But is power dressing required every day just to impress your boss to do well at office? If yes, the boss should fire the management first thing (even if its late night!). Most companies boldly state they recognise 'talent' and groom it. If a guy is uncomfortable wearing shoes, why pressurise him? Instead you could focus on his positives and develop his competencies than with holding his promotion because of a certain halo effect / stereotype you have.

A few years from now millenials will join the workforce at full swing. Wonder if we could dare ask them to come dressed to office the way we want. I bet if they'll stay long. Forget about retaining them with old school of thought.

The days are long gone if one thinks a guy who dresses smartly can kick ass every one. If you are one of those who fall in such traps, high time you realise this and come out of it. Don't ignore talent because he didn't walk into the interview room 'suited up'. A true teacher / leader is one who sees the innate hidden potential but not the present qualities. Just by looking at a seed, you can't imagine, what magnificent tree is inside it. 

Short films..what I look for?

In recent times, I have seen a lot of my friends mention about, act or direct a short film. I have seen a lot of them. Most of the times, I was thoroughly disappointed and at times surprised and mesmerised by their creativity. Now, just because one has the money to purchase a camera and got few blokes around him / her to act in a nonsensical exchange of dialogues doesn't make them good directors or actors. Same holds true the other way round, those who have a blog or express their opinion freely and think they are critiquing a work of art are equally ludicrous. 

My attempt here isn't to write the art of critiquing or acting. It is only to let enthusiastic / aspirant directors / actors know what I, an ordinary human look for in a short film.

1.Theme: To have a theme according to me is utmost important. We are being flooded by small movies all round the world. According to CBFC 15 million people watch movies every day  in India in some or the other format. Now that's a market with tremendous potential. Imagine the number of films which gets released in 13,000 theaters across India. Movies of all sorts are already ushered on to audience. Now I don't want to watch the same movies in a shorter format as well. 

2.Story line: It is must to have a story. Care must be taken that characters are woven around it. Vice versa doesn't work all the time. 

3.Editing: A poorly edited film is like food cooked without salt in it. It shows laziness on part of the film maker. I want to see a neatly edited film with not some junk thrown at me.

4.Actors: You may be making the film. Please for god sake if you can't act. Don't. Period. Please choose actors who fit the story appropriately. 

5.Lighting: Ensure that your movie is visible unless you want to keep the audience guessing.

I personally have no suggestions about how to do all these things. It is completely up to the director of a film. But if you keep the above points in mind, chances are that, audience will get interested about the movie.

Begging - What about it? Is it a crime?

It's a common sight in India, that you find beggars on streets. There are all sorts. Children, old men and women, eunuchs, crippled and at times fit men and women. If we keep aside, whether people should  and who should beg, whether its legal or not. In the recent past, I have been pestered a lot by kids and eunuchs and they wouldn't leave you till you give away money.

The other day at a temple, I had given a 2 Rs coin to a old woman who had asked for it. To my horror, she started demanding more. When I refused to give any more, she started abusing me for giving me just 2 Rs. One of my friend was telling me the other day, that, a eunuch used to come to his house daily. They would eventually give up because s/he wouldn't leave. They used to give away 1 or 2 Rs coins daily just to get rid off him/her. An year later the eunuch was demanding 10 Rs note. This exactly was what s/he said it seems, "How do you expect me to live on your 1 or 2 Rs? Don't you know about inflation? I need 10 Rs."

All these incidents made me curious. Before jumping to conclusions and making statements such as, begging is a crime, its heinous, ban begging and all. Lets analyse certain points.

What does religion say? Alms giving is an age old practice preached and followed by most religions today.  Though the seeker / receiver of the alms may not be beggars (literally). In Mahabharata, Indra has reached out to Karna in disguise of a brahmin for his armor and ear rings.  zakat, or the giving of alms, is the third of the five pillars of Islam. On one side common man, god fearing who wants to attain heaven after his death or for his ancestors' comforts in heaven is more than willing to donate. So it has been in Indian psyche to give 'something' in some or the other form.

On the flip side, why will anyone want to beg? And I have stumbled upon sources, which now treat, begging as an Industry!! According to TOI in 2006, Mumbai's beggars earn Rs 180 crore a year. Rediff in 2008 claims it to be Rs.1.8 Billion industry. Sure looks lucrative. 

Let's look at some stats. The literacy rate in India improved from 18.33% (both rural and urban) in 1951 to 69% (rural) and 85% (Urban) in 2011. That shows we still have a long way to go. We have gradually moved from Agrarian based economy to service sector based economy. The split across sectors is,
Agriculture - 17.2%
Industry - 26.4%
Services - 56.4% (Source Indexmundi)
If not for services sector, what would have been the rate of Indian unemployment? God has to answer.

There are lot of definitions for the term 'BPL' (Below Poverty Line) but according to me if a person can't eat at least one meal a day is below poverty line. In India the figure is 29.8% (Source CIA) which can easily be translated to 30 crores or more. Unemployment rate in India is no better either it stands at an estimated rate of 9.8% ( Source CIA).

So there is definitely a lot to be done not just by government but by youth in terms of employment generation. I am more than happy to notice a lot of budding entrepreneurs. Just realise we are yet to reach that point when we can treat criminals and beggars alike. Next time you see a beggar if possible donate. Else blame country's youth. But if you see someone who is completely capable of working, begging deny. Next time you find someone abusing you because you have given them JUST 2 Rs. Coolly walk up to them. Take back your money. Go to a grocery shop buy a chewing gum. You're helping the economy grow by buying goods!! 

Use and Usability of Research

I was at Hyderabad for New Year's eve. I was pulled by my friend this morning to visit a temple, which was some distance from my home. We were travelling by bike. I had traveled by the same road couple of nights earlier. Its a high way and was in a pathetic condition.To my surprise, the road was freshly relaid. I was happy for a while. But one could see the Asphalt wearing off. One heavy lash of rain, the road will be in a sorry state. It made me curious. I currently live in Bangalore and roads aren't great in Bangalore as well.  When I was a student, my college once organised a seminar on the amount of research and quality of research papers in India. Most of them were mentioning and comparing the work at par with colleges of international repute. (Hmmm!!)

Now, one can argue for hours that it is true. My intention is not to contest against it either. But I  was always asked to read / prepare for the class from foreign journals very rarely Indian. I wonder what happens to all the research that happens? I know a couple full time profs who publish, rubbish (oh absolute crap) because they have to have SOME publication with in a time frame. Do we and can we apply our own such research in India? We compare ourselves with China all the time. Fact is we are inferior to China.This is what our PM Dr.Singh had to say in 2012(An article by Nitin Sethi, in Times of India, China ahead of India in scientific research, Says PM Manmohan Singh). The situation remains as-is. I don't think so, it would have changed in an year and will change in next 10 -12 years.

In times where Social media has become the oxygen for a body called, economy. I hardly see any IIM / IIT Profs tweeting or any Indian institutes completely utilising social media tools. May be they could learn a thing or two from HBR. Why can't local governments be helped by educational institutions? After all some colleges receive huge funding. It's tax payers money. Quality of life in India can be bettered a lot if the research could be channelised properly. Any company before approaching a college for any consulting / research work should look at college's, 'local impact' i.e what could a college / educational institution do in order to improve local living conditions? How useful is the research being done locally useful? How well is the institute able to market itself? (Everyone wants to go viral these days) I believe if one can understand local needs successfully he will be in a position to estimate global needs with fair amount of accuracy.

I only hope we utilise our resources and research properly to better develop our communities. If it needs funds, government should be willing to spend and prevent brain drain. If the best of brains are forced to leave the country, it is nothing but, 'Succession Slaughter'.  Prevent it!