Read to Reap!

My attempt at making this a "reading mall"!

Sunday, March 18, 2012

The wolf who lived for the pack



Rahul Dravid drives fluently through the covers, India v West Indies, 3rd Test, Mumbai, 3rd day, November 24, 2011
Rahul Dravid: attractive and correct on and off the field © AFP
Enlarge
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/556769.html


Rahul Dravid batted exactly like the person he is: stately and upright, dignity and poise his two shoulders, standing up to everything coming at him with minimum fuss. He picked his shots carefully, almost like he was weighing the risk for fear of letting himself and his side down. There was little about him that was flamboyant - there isn't with an oak - and patiently, brick by brick, he built giant edifices. He is a good man and he batted like a good man. 

And like with most of his choices in life, he has chosen well again. He has not craved a full house on its feet, there has been no grandstanding. The retirement is a sports-page event not a gossip item. He knew it was time. "I'm sure you have thought it through," I said when he called. "I know this is the time," he said. "Any longer and it will be for the wrong reason." I expected nothing less from a man it has been my privilege to watch and to know for 16 years. 

It was but a feather that prevented him from getting a century on debut at Lord's. He would have liked it, for he has this sense of history about him. He would have wanted to be on that honours board, and 15 years later he inscribed his name there with a Dravid special. They love him there like he is one of their own, and indeed England has been a recurring motif in his life. The 1999 World Cup; the majesty of 2002, when he outbatted the world and produced one of his finest innings in Leeds; winning a series as captain in 2007; and then those three centuries last year that reminded us once again what Test cricket was all about.
At Lord's he remained not out from No. 3; at Trent Bridge he opened the batting and was ninth out; and at The Oval, at the age of 38, he had but ten minutes between deliveries as he batted through the innings for six and a half hours, before returning to open the batting. A standing ovation had just died down before another took its place. I stood too, not for the first time. 

And he loved to explore England, on foot, in buses and in trains; always asking about the latest musical and offering extended reviews of those he had seen. One such exploration took him to Scotland, from where he returned humbler, if that was indeed possible. He was getting paid to play, he said, but everyone else was paying to play - taking unpaid leave, shutting down shops, all for the sheer joy of playing. He learnt, he said, how much you can take for granted as an international star. I can see why he will continue to be a giver, why his doors will be open for other cricketers. And I hope they learn from him never to say no. 

There were two things Dravid didn't really love in cricket: opening the batting and keeping wicket. He was asked to do both at various times, and I asked him if he ever contemplated saying no. He didn't enjoy it, he said, but took it as a challenge, to see how good he could be. This acceptance of challenges is what has defined his cricket and made him one of the finest team players there has been. A challenge, he said, allowed him to understand himself better, it gave him a reason to play sport. If he shied away, he would never know how good he could be. He kept wicket in about 70 one-day internationals, never most convincingly, but he allowed himself to look bad for the team to look good. It was always the team for him and in the little piece he wrote for the book that my wife Anita and I did, he quoted Kipling: for the strength of the wolf is the pack and the strength of the pack is the wolf. It was nice to see a cricketer quoting from literature.




It is away that the most memorable innings were played; in New Zealand in 1999, England in 2002, Australia and Pakistan in 2003-04, and in the West Indies in 2006. To that extent, he was the true successor to Sunil Gavaskar




The team is like a pot, Dravid often says. Some put in and some take out. The more who put in, the fuller it gets, and those were the players he enjoyed playing with the most: those who put into the pot. He was one of the leading contributors and there was never an effort at gaining sympathy or media attention for it. He gave quietly. He was one of the reasons why India recovered so quickly from the match-fixing issue around the turn of the century. India had some outstanding men of integrity at the time. Tendulkar, Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, Laxman and Srinath. It was a good group to belong to. 

The turn of the century was also the coming of age of Dravid as an international cricketer. He had proved people wrong about his ability to play one-day cricket at the World Cup but then went to Australia convinced he needed to do well there to gain respect. It is a word he will often use in conversation ("the respect in your dressing room and that of your opponents is what matters") but in quest of it that time, he tried too hard, cocooning himself into a mass of nervous energy. He struggled but returned in 2003, at the height of his powers as a batsman, to peel off a double-century in Adelaide that won India a famous Test.
He scored many in that phase, most of them away and throughout his career, his home and away averages have sat close together. It is the mark of a genuinely great player. And it is away that the most memorable innings were played: in New Zealand in 1999, England in 2002, Australia and Pakistan in 2003-04, and in the West Indies in 2006. To that extent he was the true successor to Sunil Gavaskar. 

And his father will be proud of that. Oh, we family folk are suckers for that kind of sentiment. In 1994, when I used to do the highlights of domestic cricket for ESPN, Dravid's father would often call to ask if he could get highlights of his son's batting. The request was always very politely made and a thank you was always offered when I met him. You can see the shyness in the genes, the correctness. I don't mention it lightly. In our obsession with saluting the here and now we sometimes ignore what produced success. If Dravid senior was proud of his young man, Rahul was proud enough of his mother to be the photographer when she received her PhD. It might seem a small thing to do but it tells you a lot about the person. Giant edifices are built on solid foundations. 

And so it is with a touch of emotion that I will say goodbye to India's finest No. 3. He wasn't the Wall, not for me. Yes, his defence was as perfect as it could get, his steeliness so admirable, but he played shots that warmed the heart. The cover drive, with the big stride forward, and the prettiest of them all - the whip through midwicket played so late and while so nimble on his toes. 

He will be missed, as the great always are. He will see his children grow, take them to school, imbibe in them the reading habit (for he read more than most people I know and couldn't understand why others didn't), but from time to time he must tell the new flowers that will inevitably bloom in our cricket of the need to put grit over beauty, team over self, challenge before rejection, humility before arrogance, for that is what he stood for. 

Well played, my friend. You have the honour of leaving the game richer with your legacy and none of us can ask for anything more than that. 

Harsha Bhogle is a commentator, television presenter and writer. His Twitter feed is here
RSS Feeds: Harsha Bhogle
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.

My husband, the perfectionist



Rahul Dravid plays with son Samit outside their home in Bangalore, March 10, 2012
Dravid watches his son Samit play outside their home in Bangalore © ESPNcricinfo Ltd
Enlarge
Related Links
Tributes : Stylish in the trenches
Harsha Bhogle : The wolf who lived for the pack
Sambit Bal : Your regular, everyday superstar
Players/Officials: Rahul Dravid
Teams: India
I've been married to Rahul for almost nine years now and we have always been very private people. So I'm sure he will be astonished to find that I have written at length about him. 

This is not meant to be a song of praise for him on his retirement; that is up to the rest of the world. I am his wife, not a fan, and the reason I am writing this is to give you an insight into the role cricket has played in his life, and to take that in for myself at the end of his 16-year international career. 

Just after we got married, I remember him saying to me that he hoped to play for "the next three or four years", and that he would need me there to support him in that time. Now that he has retired, I think: "Not bad. We've done far better than the three or four years we thought about in May 2003." 

The last 12 months were special for us for more reasons than the runs or centuries Rahul has scored. After the 2010-11 tour of South Africa, our older son, Samit, suddenly developed a huge interest in cricket. When he watched Rahul score his centuries in England last year, it was as if in the last year of his career, Rahul had found his best audience. 

I was with the boys at Old Trafford when Rahul played his first (and last) Twenty20 international and then also travelled to every match of the one-day series. After the last ODI, we went into the Lord's dressing room and showed Samit and Anvay their baba's name on the honours board. It was a huge thrill for the boys to see Rahul play live in front of so many people, to see him at his "work", which kept him away from them for months. 

Cricket has been the centre of Rahul's world and his approach to every season and series has been consistent in all the time we have been married. Methodical, thoughtful and very, very organised. When I travelled with him for the first time, in Australia in 2003-04, I began to notice how he would prepare for games - the importance of routines, and his obsession with shadow practice at odd hours of day or night. I found that weird. Once, I actually thought he was sleepwalking! 

Now I know that with Rahul's cricket, nothing is casual, unconscious or accidental. Before he went on tour, I would pack all his other bags, but his cricket kit was sacred - I did not touch it; only he handled it. I know if I packed only two sets of informal clothes, he would rotate them through an entire tour if he had to and not think about it. He has used one type of moisturising cream for 20 years because his skin gets dry. Nothing else. He doesn't care for gadgets, and barely registers brands - of watches, cologne or cars. But if the weight of his bat was off by a gram, he would notice it in an instant and get the problem fixed. 

Cricket has been his priority and everyone around him knows that. On match days Rahul wanted his space and his silence. He didn't like being rushed, not for the bus, not to the crease. All he said he needed was ten minutes to himself, to get what I call his "internal milieu" settled, before he could go about a match day.
When we began to travel with the kids - and he loved having them around during a series, even when they were babies - we made sure we got two rooms. The day before every game, the boys were told that their father had to be left alone for a while, and Rahul would go into his room for his meditation and visualisation exercises. On the morning of the game, he would get up and do another session of meditation before leaving for the ground. I have tried meditation myself and I know that the zone he gets into as quickly as he does - it takes lots of years of training to get there. It is part of the complete equilibrium he tries to achieve before getting into a series. 

Like all players, Rahul has his superstitions. He doesn't try a new bat out for a series, and puts his right thigh pad on first. Last year before the Lord's Test, he made sure to sit in the same space Tillakaratne Dilshan had occupied in the visitors' dressing room when he scored nearly a double-hundred earlier in the season. Rahul scored his first hundred at Lord's in that game.



If I packed only two sets of informal clothes, he would rotate them through an entire tour if he had to and not think about it. He doesn't care for gadgets, and barely registers brands - of watches, cologne or cars. But if the weight of his bat was off by a gram, he would notice it in an instant and get the problem fixed




Once the game is on, at the end of every day he has this fantastic ability to switch off. He may be thinking about it, his batting may bother him, he will be itching to go back and try again, but he can compartmentalise his life very well. He won't order room service or brood indoors, he would rather go out, find something to do - go to a movie or watch a musical, which he loves. He will walk out to the sea to wind down or go to bookstores, or find something else to do. 

He has dealt with all that goes on in cricket because he can separate the game and the rest of his life and put things in perspective. No matter what was happening in his cricket, at home he is husband, father, family man. He has never said, "Oh I've had a bad day." He wouldn't speak about his work unless asked. Other than dropped catches.
Only once, I remember, he returned from a Test and said, "I got a bit angry today. I lost my temper. Shouldn't have done that." He wouldn't say more. Many months later, Viru [Sehwag] told me that he'd actually thrown a chair after a defeat to England in Mumbai. He'd thrown the chair, Viru said, not because the team had lost but because they had lost very badly. 

One of Rahul's great strengths is his ability - and he has had it all along - to accept reality. He believes you cannot complain about anything because there is no end to complaining. And he knows there is no end to improving either. He always looks within, to gain, to learn and to keep working at his cricket. 

In the last few years he worked doubly hard to make sure he played the game in his best physical condition in the toughest phase of his career physically. He tried to understand his body and work on his limitations - he was able to hold off shoulder surgery despite a problem in his rotator cuff because he found ways to keep it strong. When I was pregnant with Samit, we spent two months in South Africa to work in a sports centre that focused on strengthening Rahul's shoulder. Because he sweats profusely, he has even had sweat analysis done, to see how that affects his batting. He found that Pat Rafter, the former Australian tennis player, had a similar problem. 

To get fit, he went on very difficult protein diets for three months at a stretch, giving up rice, chapatis and dessert altogether - even though he has a sweet tooth. He wanted his batting and his cricket to benefit from his peak fitness, even heading into his late 30s. He has been to see a specialist in eye co-ordination techniques, for eye exercises for the muscles of his eyes. If there was a problem, he always tried to find answers. 

Outside cricket, Rahul is a man of no fuss. If he's on a diet, he will eat whatever is served, as long as it fits the diet. Even if the same food keeps turning up on his plate for days in a row, he will eat it without complaint. If he drops a catch, though, it bothers him enough to talk about it on the phone when we speak in the evening; during matches, it is the only part of cricket that he will talk about without me asking him about it. In 2009 he lost his old, faded India cap, when it was stolen from a ground. He was very, very upset about it. It was dear to him and he was extremely proud to wear it. 

People always ask me the reason for Rahul being a "normal" person, despite the fame and the celebrity circus. I think it all began with his middle-class upbringing, of being taught to believe in fundamental values like humility and perspective. He has also had some very old, solid friendships that have kept him rooted.
He is fond of reading, as many know, and has a great sense of and interest in history of all kinds - of the game he plays and also of the lives of some of the world's greatest men. When he started his cricket career, he had a coach, Keki Tarapore, who probably taught him to be a good human being along with being a good cricketer. 

All of this has given Rahul a deep understanding of what exactly was important about his being in cricket and what was not. It can only come from a real love for the game. When I began to understand the kind of politics there are in the game, he only said one thing: that this game has given me so much in life that I will never be bitter. There is so much to be thankful for, no matter what else happens, that never goes away.

Rahul Dravid celebrates with son Samit and wife Vijeta,South Africa v India, 1st Test, Johannesburg, 4th day, December 18, 2006
Dravid with Vijeeta and Samit after the victory in the Johannesburg Test in 2006 © AFP
Enlarge

Cricket has made Rahul who he is, and I can say that he was able to get the absolute maximum out of his abilities as an international cricketer. 

What next for him? I know he likes his routine and he's in a good zone when he is in his routine, so we will have to create one at home for him. Getting the groceries could be part of that. A cup of tea in the morning for his wife would be a lovely bonus, I would think, particularly now that he doesn't have to take off for the gym or for training at the KSCA at the crack of dawn. 

More seriously, though, I think he will spend time relaxing and reading to let it all sink in a bit. He has loved music and wants to learn how to play the guitar. Then perhaps he would like to find something that fills in at least some of the place that cricket occupied in his life, something challenging and cerebral.
Rahul has lived his dream and he thinks it's time to move on. Retirement will mean a big shift in his life, of not have training or team-mates around him, or the chance to compete against the best. The family, though, is delighted to have him back. 

Vijeeta has been married to Rahul Dravid for nine years. They have two sons
© ESPN EMEA Ltd.

The tale of 2 Rahuls


Politics is the original 'dirty picture', cruel and ruthless. Last week, on the day the legendary Rahul Dravid announced his retirement from international cricket, an sms doing the rounds said: "Why has the wrong Rahul retired?" The Uttar Pradesh defeat has suddenly led to obituaries being written of Rahul Gandhi, the same Rahul whose each and every move, during the elections, was followed by a frenzied media. Perhaps, for a few days, the political Rahul might have felt like his cricketing namesake. After all, soon after the Australia tour debacle, we had cricket fans calling for the removal of the 'senior' players. They conveniently forgot that Dravid had scored four remarkable centuries in five games only months earlier in England. Politics, like cricket, can be extraordinarily fickle. 

That's where though, I am afraid, the comparisons between the two Rahuls might end. Dravid, after all, represents a triumph of middle class India blessed with solid old-fashioned values of hard work and determination. He did not arrive on the cricket scene with a silver spoon or with a famous surname. It is often forgotten that Dravid had to play almost half a dozen years in the Ranji Trophy for Karnataka before he was picked for the country for the sheer weight of his runs. Cricket is the ultimate meritocracy where talent, and not lineage, matters.

By contrast, in politics, especially the Congress party, only family appears to matter. Sriprakash Jaiswal (this government's foot-in-the-mouth prize-winner) revealed the sycophantic Congress mindset when he claimed that Rahul Gandhi could be Prime Minister if he wanted so even at midnight. Defeats like UP are, to that extent, only minor blips in Rahul's political career since for the average Congressman, the Gandhi family is preordained to rule India. 

Rahul Dravid had to prove himself in Karnataka before he could aspire to play for India. Rahul Gandhi, it seems, faces no such similar 'shop floor' test. What is true of the Gandhis at the Centre is true to a lesser or greater degree in most states and political parties except the Left and the BJP. Even the latest political posterboy, Akhilesh Yadav, would not be the UP chief minister at 38 if he were not Mulayam Singh Yadav's son. 

Rahul Dravid's career also represents the ultimate triumph of placing the team above the individual. Whether be it his brave decision to declare an innings when the mighty Tendulkar was batting on 194 in a Test match, or taking on the unfamiliar role of a wicket-keeper, Dravid always put his team first. By contrast, the Uttar Pradesh election became more about Brand Rahul when it really should have been structured around Team Congress. It would be unfair to blame Rahul Gandhi for this but the fact is the era of an Indira-like politician with a cross-class, cross-caste appeal is truly over. Individual charisma alone will not win you an election; a strong grassroots organisation will give you a distinct edge in a competitive election space. 

Rahul Dravid's greatness can also be measured by the fact that he did not resort to theatrics at any stage in his long career which explains why he is so universally respected in the cricket world. Rahul Gandhi, by contrast, has shown a proclivity for political theatre. Be it staying in a Dalit's home for a night or tearing up the Samajwadi Party manifesto at a public meeting, there is a touch of histrionics in his politics that can be self-defeating. We live in an age where an earthy 'rootedness' is often more appreciated than designer flamboyance. Building a political organisation is not like a T 20 match; it requires dogged persistence to overcome all obstacles over a lengthy period of time. 

What is also striking about Rahul the cricketer is how he always raised the bar for himself. When he started off in his career, he was seen as little more than a solid Test match player. Over time, he evolved into a top class One Day player. By the end of his career, he was a shot maker good enough to be picked for 20-20 cricket. From being a useful slip fielder, he ended his career by becoming the first fielder to take more than 200 catches. At every stage, it seemed as if he wanted to take on a new challenge that would stretch his abilities to the limit.

By contrast, Rahul Gandhi still hasn't been able to take his politics to the next level, quite simply because we still don't know who the real Rahul is, despite him being in public life now for almost a decade. Encircled by security and a small coterie of advisers, he hasn't really opened himself up for scrutiny. Yes, his Hindi and oratorical skills have shown a staggering improvement and his acceptance of personal responsibility for the UP defeat was a step in the right direction. But we still don't have a clear idea where he stands on most critical issues of national importance. Even his one intervention during the Lokpal debate was a prepared speech rather than a spontaneous expression of his political beliefs. At 41, he still seems somehow stuck in the image of a youth leader, still discovering India rather than one ready to lead it.

Rahul Dravid spent most of his career under the shadow of the great Tendulkar. But he never let that overawe him. Rather, he used the opportunity to carve out an independent identity for himself, emerging as Indian cricket's man for all seasons. Like 'The Wall,' who went on to become the country's finest ever number three batsman. Rahul too has grown up in the shadows, in a way, of the Indira-Rajiv-Sonia triumvirate. It's time now for him to break free and become his own man. In cricketing terms, he needs to raise his game before it's too late.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

The Aditi song in Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na

I love it! Every time I listen to this song, my heart dances. Its a scintillating song. I mean, there have been innumerable songs in Bollywood over the last few decades, where the hero of the movie is in the mode of "Sorry, babe. I will make it up to you", or, in the mode of, "Oops! What happened? What can I do to cheer you up?", etc. These songs have usually been immensely lively, shot in very natural environs such as beaches, gardens, and other public places (yet another option for heroes and heroines to run around trees!). But, this Aditi song is incredibly different.

And I love it! Its got energy; purpose; sense of occasion;fantastic sense of humour;easy on the heart;and it makes me feel so nice at the end of it all. Especially that one line, "Aditi, hans de, hans de.....tu zara" - that is so typical of a guy trying to cheer up his girl, in every discernible way that he can think of. It is also possibly the expression that would account for the fact that a guy will do anything to see his babe happy & even a frown on her face propels him deep into depression!

Infact, I love this song so much, that my tired legs begin to automatically move whenever I listen to this song, irrespective of where I am (which is usually in a car or a shuttle from/to office, when I hear this song). Every time I listen to this song, it energises me and makes my heart dance. I don't know why, but maybe, because it gives me so much happiness that, in this world of materialism, there are some old world charms still alive & kicking. Ones uch divine charm, is to see your babe happy. Or, even any dear friend of the opposite sex who you get along with famously, happy.

Kabhi Aditi....terrific song! I plan to download this into my iPod, rather than wait for only FM radio to play it!

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Buy American. I Am. - Warren Buffet

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/17buffett.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

THE financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher. In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary.

So ... I’ve been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I’m talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds. (This description leaves aside my Berkshire Hathaway holdings, which are all committed to philanthropy.) If prices keep looking attractive, my non-Berkshire net worth will soon be 100 percent in United States equities.

Why?

A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. And most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation’s many sound companies make no sense. These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records 5, 10 and 20 years from now.

Let me be clear on one point: I can’t predict the short-term movements of the stock market. I haven’t the faintest idea as to whether stocks will be higher or lower a month — or a year — from now. What is likely, however, is that the market will move higher, perhaps substantially so, well before either sentiment or the economy turns up. So if you wait for the robins, spring will be over.

A little history here: During the Depression, the Dow hit its low, 41, on July 8, 1932. Economic conditions, though, kept deteriorating until Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in March 1933. By that time, the market had already advanced 30 percent. Or think back to the early days of World War II, when things were going badly for the United States in Europe and the Pacific. The market hit bottom in April 1942, well before Allied fortunes turned. Again, in the early 1980s, the time to buy stocks was when inflation raged and the economy was in the tank. In short, bad news is an investor’s best friend. It lets you buy a slice of America’s future at a marked-down price.

Over the long term, the stock market news will be good. In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497.

You might think it would have been impossible for an investor to lose money during a century marked by such an extraordinary gain. But some investors did. The hapless ones bought stocks only when they felt comfort in doing so and then proceeded to sell when the headlines made them queasy.

Today people who hold cash equivalents feel comfortable. They shouldn’t. They have opted for a terrible long-term asset, one that pays virtually nothing and is certain to depreciate in value. Indeed, the policies that government will follow in its efforts to alleviate the current crisis will probably prove inflationary and therefore accelerate declines in the real value of cash accounts.

Equities will almost certainly outperform cash over the next decade, probably by a substantial degree. Those investors who cling now to cash are betting they can efficiently time their move away from it later. In waiting for the comfort of good news, they are ignoring Wayne Gretzky’s advice: “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.”

I don’t like to opine on the stock market, and again I emphasize that I have no idea what the market will do in the short term. Nevertheless, I’ll follow the lead of a restaurant that opened in an empty bank building and then advertised: “Put your mouth where your money was.” Today my money and my mouth both say equities.

Warren E. Buffett is the chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway, a diversified holding company.

Sunday, April 09, 2006

Play it again, Paes - The Hindu

http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/10/stories/2006041006511900.htm

Play it again, Paes

Sport is mostly trival pursuit. It is men such as Leander Paes and Steve Waugh who elevate it, writes Nirmal Shekhar


Sixteen years ago, on a windy morning in Melbourne, as noisy passenger and cargo trains drowned out the calls made by a rather soft-spoken chair umpire in an `outback' court at Flinders Park, an Indian spectator — one of two in attendance — turned to his companion and said, "`The kid has it, doesn't he?'' The man sitting next to him nodded, and smiled.

We — Rohit Brijnath, familiar to most readers of these columns, and I — knew on that bright January morning that we were witness to something special. Leander Adrian Paes, all of 16 years old, was playing one of the highest ranked junior stars of those days — Jan Kodes Jr., son of the 1973 Wimbledon champion Jan Kodes — and dominating the Czech teenager with his sheer strength of will in the Australian Open.

A pair of hardened sports writers sat on seat-edge and heralded the arrival of a special champion on that day not because Leander's shotmaking skills were extraordinary; they did so because few

Indian sportsmen, and perhaps no Indian tennis player before him, had displayed the raw fighting skills that Leander showcased when the chips were down.

Since that unforgettable day in Melbourne, through everything that has happened in Indian sport — from the highs of the Tendulkars and the Anands and Dravids — one little thing has remained unchanged. When it comes to spilling his guts in the cause of the nation, one man has stood head and shoulders above the rest — Leander Paes.

A yardstick

This is precisely why Leander transcends sport — _ he is much more than a tennis champion, or even an athletic achiever. As an Indian, Leander is a yardstick. You measure every other champion of the era against Leander when it comes to commitment to the country's cause. Even our admirable, upstanding cricket captain Rahul Dravid — who comes closest — for instance. And this is no insult to the man from Bangalore. It is, in fact, a tribute.

Watching Leander fight cramps, and a little-known Pakistani opponent, in the decisive fifth rubber on Sunday, a question suddenly popped up in my mind yet again. Has winning for the country ever meant so much to any other athlete in the entire history of sport in India? Has it ever meant as much to anyone as it does to Leander?

Not for a moment would any sane Indian ever question the patriotic zeal of several sporting icons who have brought off great victories for India. Nobody in his right mind would ever say that these sportspersons gave anything less than 100 per cent each time they turned out for the country. Yet, the question remains. Would the odd failure when playing for the country have shattered their hearts as devastatingly as it happens each time Leander fails to win a crucial rubber for India in the Davis Cup?

Pride and commitment

In the pantheon of Indian sport, the Gavaskars, Tendulkars, Krishnans and Anands may demand — and deserve too — more prominent places than Leander, but no man who has ever played for India can claim to have done so with greater pride and commitment and with a bigger heart than India's Davis Cup hero. This is a fact that is underlined every single time that Leander turns himself into a virtual one-man army on the Davis Cup stage.

Money doesn't move Leander, emotions do. As a product of the I-Me generation, Leander is very much an outsider. The biggest source of his motivation is not the same as it might be for the average champion of his generation. This is precisely why he seems to be able to climb on some invisible ladder to achieve an impressive altitude when playing for the country.

In the context of what Leander pulled off in Mumbai on Sunday, it's all very well to talk about an opponent being a push-over. But, then, it still takes someone who is brave enough, and strong-willed enough, to do the pushing. And, in Indian sport, not the least in Indian tennis, when push comes to shove, more often than not, many of our champions move over rather than come forward courageously to author the final act.

Say all you want about dazzling skills, celebrate all you want the gifts of an array of superstars in the sport of your choice. But give me an ageing, hobbled, down-and-out Leander any day — with the scores tied two sets apiece in the fifth rubber of a Davis Cup tie.

This writer has found only one thing equally soul-lifting in sport: Steve Waugh walking in to bat for Australia with his team staring down the barrel, four down for 49. Sport is mostly trivial pursuit.

Some moments, rarely, go beyond its defined boundaries. Mostly it is men such as Leander and Waugh who author those special moments that elevate sport.

Sunday, April 02, 2006

Welcome to America

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2006/04/02/stories/2006040200180400.htm
NIRUPAMA VAIDHYANATHAN

"MY daughter's going to the United States to do her Master's in Engineering at Texas" — we often hear statements like that. How do these students fare culturally and socially in their first few months of university life in America?

Strange surroundings

Sanchit Agarwal, in Ohio State University, says, "I still remember the strangeness of the physical surroundings. At the Chicago airport, I remember feeling that an English film was going on, and that I had to become a part of it. And, as I walked through the airport, the sight of another Indian made me feel happy."

Indian graduate students feel a sense of freedom after leaving the cocoon of Indian family life. But, along with that comes the burden of living life in a new country, with few close relatives to depend on for emotional support. Manish (name changed at his request) said, "I would pester my mother to write a letter every week. Her reply was that there was nothing new to write about every week. Yet, reading about her weekly routine gave me a feeling of security that nothing could match in the first few months". When one goes to the USIS in India and spends hours poring over information about universities, "loneliness" is not a term that you come across. But, that is a reality for many graduate students, till they build a supportive community of friends around them.

In the first few months of life, common concerns revolve around issues of surviving day-to-day life on a university campus. Many students found ordering food in a restaurant a daunting task. Kanwarpreet Dang, being particular about eating only vegetarian food, says, "Initially I just had raw vegetables and Coke."

Another daunting task is renting an apartment, finding room-mates and learning how to read and sign a rental lease. Then comes the task of pulling out cooking utensils, doing grocery shopping and getting an edible meal to the table. How do you get to the only Indian grocery store in town, which is a few miles away? Most of the time, you would probably find an Indian "senior" who has a second-hand car, and then, what do most Indian students do at the grocery store? They convert every purchase into rupees, of course, trying to debate the merits of each and every purchase. So, as Anand Subramaniam from the New Jersey Institute of Technology says, imitating new students, "A can of milk costs Rs. 250. Let's not buy that".

But, for each of these issues, the Indian Student Associations (ISA) that exist in many American universities have helped provide solutions. They are built around this guiding principle — "Being a `senior' in this system, I know what it is like to go through the first year of student life in the U.S. How can I help you get a footing in this country with little heartache?" The websites of several ISAs have detailed instructions. There are lists of clothes to bring, checklists of cooking utensils, advice urging students to learn recipes at home, details of baggage specifications, lists of documents to carry in your hand baggage etc. A few weeks of monitoring emails on an ISA bulletin board reveals the crucial role they play in helping newcomers through a difficult period of transition. Starting with airport pick-ups, the first few weeks of temporary accommodation are also arranged for. After being in this atmosphere for a few days, the Indian students can look for roommates among incoming students. Ohio State University ISA Treasurer, Kirtiraj Parmar says, "For the first time this year, we are planning a separate orientation session aimed at helping students from India."

What do Indian students face inside the classrooms? The informal atmosphere of the American classroom throws some of them off-guard. Calling a Professor by his first name poses a problem for Indian students. At the same time, this informal air belies the hard work that is done throughout the year. As Sandeep Ramachandran from Texas A & M says, "Most of us are used to cramming in the few days before the final exam. Here, if you get out of the loop at any point, it becomes very difficult to catch up."

Learning to manage time

The other issues that Indian students face is poor time management skills and very high expectations of student integrity. Class times are adhered to strictly, and keeping track of multiple courses requires good time management skills. There are no shortcuts to academic success within the American University system and stealing of ideas without quoting sources are treated with punishment, leading to a suspension from the university. American university life poses challenges on several fronts in the first few months for Indian students. But, once they settle in, most enjoy student life to a great extent. Graduate education in American universities provides many Indian students an educational experience that they treasure throughout their lives.



Nirupama Vaidhyanathan is a Bharatanatyam dancer, teacher and writer who is interested in issues related to the Indian diaspora. She lives in San Francisco.

A brave new world - ANIMA BALAKRISHNAN

http://www.hindu.com/mp/2006/04/03/stories/2006040300600100.htm
Hindu Metro Plus
April 3,2006

Barely into his 20s, Samit Basu dared to take a decision that was considered madness. He dropped out of IIM-A to write a book. Now at 26, he has two fantasy novels to his credit — The Simoqin Prophecies and The Manticore's Secret — and the concluding part of the trilogy is on the way.

Basu is not alone to have walked away from a premier institute, a prestigious degree, a job to die for and big money. More and more IT and management professionals are bidding adieu to a cushy life to realise their calling. Software programmes and marketing strategies have given way to fiction, pre-schools and reporting.

"IT jobs are challenging and I believe it's a good career path. But I was not putting my talent to full use," says 26-year-old Vasudevan Rangarajan, who quit his job with JP Morgan Chase to join the media.

Twenty-six-year-old Vardan Kabra knew he wanted to be an entrepreneur right from his days at IIT-Mumbai. So, after his MBA from IIM-A, he spurned a P&G offer to set up the Fountainhead Education Foundation in Surat.

"I always knew I wanted to do something on my own. I may not have had the business skill to do that after my engineering. So, a management degree was a logical choice," he adds.

But they all agree that saying no to all that came with the sought-after-job was not easy.

"Most of my family and friends thought I was plain crazy, but those who were really close to me and knew I was planning to write, were supportive," says Basu. Jacob Alexander, who did his B. Tech in Computer Science, could not resist the lure of writing and publishing. "Though my family was supportive, the pressure was always there.

They still try to convince me to return to a conventional job," says 25-year-old Jacob, an editorial executive with a publishing house.

If a "perfect" job at a young age once meant a passport to blissful existence, it is now about discovering where your talent lies.

For Vasudevan, it would have been "a fair and stable climb." But media is the happening field in India; there are risks involved and the play is going to be exciting.

It is not enough to pursue your passion, but also ensure it pays. "Right now, I'm doing work I really love and getting paid for it," says Basu.

For Kabra, with the Fountainhead Pre-School completing its first year, things are looking up. "The drawback about an enterprise is that it takes a year and a half to yield results. It is the prospect of immediate financial gain that has to be forgone," says Kabra.

Of course, there are no regrets. "I've never had a single occasion to regret not doing my MBA. Sure, I would have earned more money, but money isn't all that important," says Basu. For him, it is the "creative satisfaction, the opportunity to meet great people, control over my own time and the joy of seeing my own book."

Kabra believes it is about giving Generation Next better education. "I have studied in several schools and was not happy with what I got. Towards the end, the curiosity element in me was zero," he says. His school aims to make learning a joyful experience for the child.

"Moments of doubt, not at all," says Kabra. But pangs are, of course, there when he sees his classmates taking home hefty pay packs, for he knows he was equally talented to do that.

The emphasis seems to be able to think out of the box. "Here in Class X, it's decided what you should do and it is about plodding to reach there," says Vasudevan.

The road not taken

But post-1990s, there has been a change, "As the economy matures and diverse jobs are available, people will gradually begin to realise that the jobs we grow up thinking are good are rather boring. And for the first time, in this country, you have a chance to do whatever you want and make money doing it as well," says Basu.

As Jacob puts it, "It is about not taking the beaten path, but picking up what you are comfortable with." Though their professional degrees are always a security, going back is "an option locked away," says Vasudevan. "I have already made a choice and I am sticking on," says Jacob.

In a nutshell, Vasudevan says, "A convert is more religious than the priest."

Friday, March 03, 2006

Stray thoughts:T N Ninan

T N Ninan / New Delhi March 04, 2006
Business Standard


In a week packed with high-wattage events in New Delhi, what ruminations should one focus on? The first is about positioning for photo ops. For those who haven’t read up on body language, the rule about handshakes is that the power position in a handshake is the one on the left of the viewer or camera. That way, your hand is pushing down while the chap on the right has his palm facing up in the handshake—a position of weakness. The shoulder angle is also more comfortable for the person on the left, since it is the right hand that you are shaking, so your entire body seems more at ease when the cameras click away. Which is why you will almost always find the US President on the left side of the frame in a handshake. That cannot be accident, it must be design—so they have thought it through. Look at the pictures of George W Bush and Manmohan Singh outside Hyderabad House on Thursday, and the message becomes clear. As a subsidiary point, it is only the person on the left who has the opportunity to place his (left) hand, in another show of power, around the shoulder of the person on the right (as Mr Bush did with the Prime Minister).

If this much is obvious to the Americans, why is it something that no one in South Block has thought of? Look at the Agra pictures of Mr Vajpayee and Gen. Musharraf, and you’ll get the point even more clearly. One hopes it isn’t the case that such trifling considerations are considered unworthy thoughts, because subliminal messages are important—and that is what body language is all about. Look at Abhishek Bachchan’s body language as he emerged with Aishwarya Rai in Lucknow the other day, and you’ll get the point! As an interesting aside, the camera positions for welcoming ceremonies on the White House lawns are such that the US President looms larger than the visiting dignitary. Thought of that in the forecourt of Rashtrapati Bhavan?

The second (less flaky?) thought is about a retired foreign secretary confessing some years ago that, in all his travels with Indira Gandhi, he found the only thing that her interlocutors were really interested in (beyond the diplomatic politeness of listening to her views on Third World solidarity, or whatever) were two subjects: India’s nuclear policy and whether it would open up its market. Since India was not willing to oblige on either count in those days, relationships with the western powers didn’t go beyond a distant wave of the hand as we went our separate ways. It’s interesting to note, therefore, that nuclear and economic policies are now at the heart of the new relationship with the US. Indeed, the nuclear deal has as its underpinning the need to help India, with its rapidly expanding markets, develop non-hydrocarbon energy sources so that it does not draw more and more of the world’s oil and gas and send their prices even higher as a consequence. As for trade, India is still only the 22nd largest trading partner for the US, which is to say that it doesn’t really count. But it will not stay that way. With the nuclear bone swallowed, and the Indian market opening up, the two countries now have the basis for a genuinely good relationship.

The third and final rumination is about Mr Chidambaram—who has become the fifth finance minister to present five Budgets. Next year will be a record sixth. One must presume that Mr Chidambaram will be asking himself, what lines in the sand must he leave behind? For sure, the tax cuts and other policy announcements in the 1997 Budget will be remembered, but that was long ago. The big opportunity today is to be the finance minister who gets rid of the revenue deficit and introduces the unified goods and services tax—both would be seminal achievements. So why has he chosen 2010 as the target date for introducing a unified goods and services tax, and not 2009, which is when his government’s term in office ends? Any guesses?

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Don't Hope Friend...Decide

Don't Hope Friend...Decide
by Michael Hargrove

While waiting to pick up a friend at the airport in Portland, Oregon, I had one of those life-changing experiences that you hear other people talk about. You know, the kind that sneaks up on you unexpectedly? Well, this one occurred a mere two feet away from me! Straining to locate my friend among the passengers deplaning through the jet way, I noticed a man coming toward me carrying two light bags. He stopped right next to me to greet his family.

First, he motioned to his youngest son (maybe six years old) as he laid down his bags. They gave each other a long, and movingly loving hug. As they separated enough to look in each other's face, I heard the father say, "It's so good to see you, son. I missed you so much!" His son smiled somewhat shyly, diverted his eyes, and replied softly, "Me too, Dad!"

Then the man stood up, gazed in the eyes of his oldest son (maybe 9) and while cupping his son's face in his hands he said, "You're already quite the young man. I love you very much Zach!" They too hugged a most loving, tender hug. His son said nothing. No reply was necessary.

While this was happening, a baby girl (perhaps one or one and a half) was squirming excitedly in her mother's arms, never once taking her little eyes off the wonderful sight of her returning father. The man said, "Hi baby girl!" as he gently took the child from her mother. He quickly kissed her face all over and then held her close to his chest while rocking her from side to side. The little girl instantly relaxed and simply laid her head on his shoulder and remained motionless in total pure contentment.

After several moments, he handed his daughter to his oldest son and declared, "I've saved the best for last!" and proceeded to give his wife the longest, most passionate kiss I ever remember seeing. He gazed into her eyes for several seconds and then quietly said, "I love you so much!". They stared into each other's eyes, beaming big smiles at one another, while holding both hands. For an instant, they reminded me of newlyweds but I knew by the age of their kids that they couldn't be. I puzzled about it for a moment, then realized how totally engrossed I was in the wonderful display of unconditional love not more than an arm's length away from me. I suddenly felt uncomfortable, as if I were invading something sacred, but was amazed to hear my own voice nervously ask, "Wow! How long have you two been married?"

"Been together fourteen years total, married twelve of those." he replied without breaking his gaze from his lovely wife's face.

"Well then, how long have you been away?" I asked. The man finally looked at me, still beaming his joyous smile and told me, "Two whole days!"

Two days?! I was stunned! I was certain by the intensity of the greeting I just witnessed that he'd been gone for at least several weeks, if not months, and I know my expression betrayed me. So, I said almost offhandedly, hoping to end my intrusion with some semblance of grace (and to get back to searching for my friend), "I hope my marriage is still that passionate after twelve years!"

The man suddenly stopped smiling. He looked me straight in the eye, and with an intensity that burned right into my soul, he told me something that left me a different person. He told me, "Don't hope friend...decide." Then he flashed me his wonderful smile again, shook my hand and said, "God bless!". With that, he and his family turned and energetically strode away together.

I was still watching that special man and his exceptional family walk just out of sight when my friend came up to me and asked, "What'cha looking at?" Without hesitating, and with a curious sense of certainty, I replied, "My future!"


About the Author:
© Copyright 1997 by Michael D. Hargrove.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Still in love after seeing 77 Valentine's Days

Still in love after seeing 77 Valentine's Days

Salem (US): Fred Landis has a Valentine's Day ritual. Sometime, somewhere, he'll lean over to his wife, Gwen, and say, ''I love you.'' They say he's been doing that on Valentine's Days since 1928, when they were married.

In October 2005, Fred, 102, and Gwen, 101, celebrated their 77th wedding anniversary, and they are not far shy of a record. The longest current marriage, according to the 2006 edition of Guinness World Records, is 78 years, 296 days.


On Valentine's Day 2006, Fred will say ''I love you'' a bit louder than he used to because Gwen is hard of hearing. Fred has macular degeneration, which has kept him from writing poetry for her.Gwen says Fred wrote poems to her during their courtship, a gesture that may have won her heart.

"I think that had something to do with it", she said with a shy smile.
They met in 1924 as college students, he at Albany College and she at Simpson Bible College in Seattle. Fred attended a church where Gwen's father was the pastor. When they were married, Gwen's father performed the ceremony.

Gwen remembers receiving $800 for a wedding gift, then losing it all in the stock-market crash the following year.The Landises spent the next four decades working in ministry and raising four children. Fred was the pastor at several small churches in the Northwest.Gwen played the piano and organ and taught Sunday school.
He retired in 1970, and they have lived in Salem since then. They moved to a retirement center in 1994.

"They're just wonderful people.You couldn't find any better", says a friend, Dorothea McAuley."They're setting an example for everybody.They're always happy. I've never seen one of them angry. They're God's example".

Commitment is the word Gwen uses to describe their marriage success.Fred agrees.
"Sure, we've had squabbles and disagreements galore",he said."But there's a commitment to marriage because we have a reverence to it".

They have eight grandchildren and 19 great-grandchildren.Son John,67,says he continues to be amazed by his parents,their relationship and their lives.
"I think--I know--they would not have lived this long singly",John says."They keep each other going".

Sunday, February 05, 2006

Vivek Paul's elephant trick - www.news.com

Vivek Paul's elephant trick
June 30, 2005 5:05 PM PDT
http://news.com.com/2061-10788_3-5770737.html

One of the world's most respected business leaders owes much of his success to the failings of an elephant.

Vivek Paul, who recently decided to step down as CEO of Wipro Technologies to become a venture capitalist, says one key to his achievement is a sharp focus on improving business processes. The other major factor has to do with the "soft" side of management--he says people tend to limit themselves.

Encouraging Wipro employees to bust self-imposed boundaries may have helped Paul lead his business to ramp up revenue from $150 million in 1999 to $1.4 billion in 2004.

But it was his encounter with an elephant outside of Bangalore more than a dozen years ago that crystallized this philosophy.

Paul was curious why an elephant tied to a small stake in the ground did not yank it up and be on its way. The animal's handler explained that baby elephants tied to similar stakes learn they can't break free. As elephants grow older and stronger, they don't test the stake again--thereby remaining trapped by what should be an obsolete restraint.

"I said, 'By gosh! That's probably relevant to people as well,'" Paul said.

Posted by Ed Frauenheim

EQ In, IQ Out? - Economic Times

EQ In, IQ Out? Cos looking beyond IIMs
K YATISH RAJAWAT & KALA VIJAYRAGHAVAN
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, FEBRUARY 06, 2006 02:03:23 AM]
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1401936,curpg-3.cms

MUMBAI: Corporates such as HSBC, LG, HLL and a host of others are changing mindset while hiring talent to tackle a fiercely competitive global marketplace.

HR experts find that in some cases companies prefer emotional quotient (EQ) over intelligent quotient (IQ) when it comes to risk-taking and decision-making ability in a tough marketplace. Consequently, companies are opting for different sorts of talent by recruiting not only from top management institutes but also from the third-rung institutes.

Some companies feel that students with exposure to tougher living standards fare better at decision-making and risk-taking capabilities in a globalised marketplace than students from financially well-off and comfortable backgrounds (typically IIMs).

In fact, several companies are trying to get out of a blinkered mindset to tap talent from even the third-rung management institutes. “I think most of us are shaking off blinkered mindsets about hiring talent. Enterprise and risk-taking capabilities matter more in a competitive market.

A high score at academics may mean a high IQ but we need academics with a higher EQ. And that’s not really learnt at business schools,” said Y Verma, HR head at LG Electronics. A highly placed HLL official said students with better EQ were being favoured over toppers.

“Times have changed now and the marketplace has got too stressful. Of course, we continue to tap the IIMs where the strike rates are always better than other institutes, where a bit more hunting has to be done to tap good students.

A lot also depends on how much time a senior management give to recruitment processes. But it is true that a better EQ fares better in the face of competition,” he said. HR heads of several coprorates said IIM graduates seem to be have more attitudinal issues since students tend to come from more well-off families.

They have high expectations. Ramalingam Raju, chairman of Satyam Computers, a serial entrepreneur, says that he believes the attitude determines the success of an individual in an organisation.

“Indian corporates have typically been paying a higher price for talent not as good. IIMs are getting to be more of a status symbol. Most of them are not very open to handling risks. Corporates tell us that. “IIMs may be hard-working but not really enterprising.

The programmes designed at IIMs are more knowledge-driven and do not actually tackle business competancies,” said Pramod Kumar, president of International School of Business & Media.

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Night Reporters - CNN IBN Blog

The Night Reporters.......!!!
Sunday , January 22, 2006
CNN IBN

For someone, comparatively new in journalism and also fresh from a print background just the idea of a grave-yard shift gave me the jitters. the first question that apparently hits you is how to keep track of any news when calling up your sources at this insane hour could very well be risky enough to lose them.

One thing you make sure is to dig up all the music cd's and books that you may have wanted to read for a long time but never really could find the time....what better time than,when you are on the night shift. Just the time, to catch up on all of these.

Someone suggests calling up the control room and keeping a track on things...but two nights down the line and you realize there are more things happening on other channels than anything the bored sleepy cop on the graveyard shift would ever mumble to you between animated yawns.

And then you happen to talk to a reporter from another channel...and this nice soul promises to alert you to anything he comes to know...Quite a relief I must say...just to know that you are not on it alone....and then finally on the fourth night you get an sms...a fire somewhere.....you are completely woken up from the mild slumber that creeps in from doing nothing...

You wake up everyone else...the logistics, the cameraman, the driver...and everyone else you find sleeping around...just to put up an air of urgency...and emergency...and most of all a plain attempt at showing off that...hey dude...I finally get a chance at some action. You rush to the car....and between frantic calls to the reporter who gave you the news, you remind your driver to drive faster...sooner and also remind him that he's now driving for a news channel and not for some saab who's anyways bored of getting back home after a party.

You reach the spot and the first thing that hits you is the plethora of cars from other channels that are also parked there and a few, following you through the same narrow lane...and lucky you, the incident is a mild/minor one to really report anything...A final attempt(considering you were the last one to reach the spot) to get the administration heads to give you a bite on the issue.... and then you start chating with the other reporters...A discovery in the making for you..... this new community........the community of Night Reporters

A pleasant bunch in themselves......after the initial ice-breaking...the focus is then shifts to where to go from there.....one suggests the "usual place" the other suggests a place he's newly discovered...another suggests some really cool place to eat. And finally the destination chosen on consensus.....The fleet of cars now move to the decided destination. This time around....the Sea Face at Worli.

It's quite a party with some having brought their "dabbas" from home and with the chaiwallah on the cycle, making a decent buck. It's quite a nice experience......jokes.....experiences and the like do the rounds. On-camera guffaws etc...the clichés.....common industry talks.........all start doing the rounds...and then comes a whistle.....it's the the cop on his mid-night beat.

Out to make a quick buck from this "mixed group of college students making a ruckus on the sea-face", the havildar hits the ground with his 'lathi' and comes rushing, yelling for everyone to clear the place...and then all of a sudden his heart misses a beat....as he notices from the corner of his eyes, the cars parked next to the jolly group...he gives them a second look...this time over....a close one......and he notices the "PRESS" stickers with the company logos on all of them

"Ha sagle media walle aahe" (These are all people from the media) his partner mumbles to him...and then in a manner that could put a school kid caught stealing a cookie...to shame, the cop does a complete turnaround and smiles at the group....comes over, inspects the food being devoured upon......and in the most innocent voice asks, "kai kartoye..??? Jevan challalele aahe kaai?" (What are you doing..?? Eating?). And this sudden softness, only because he sees that we are a group of journalists.

A couple of chais down and someone suddenly reminds us of the silent sounds of hunger creeping in our tummies...and the next venue....DADAR Railway station......and a couple of newer discoveries....bun maska.....midnight pav bhaji or bhurji pav....and the best of them all....succulent Chocolate chai...(ever heard of that anyone...????)

Fed and content....and with a promise to call and be alerted incase any news breaks in the next few hours before dawn, the late night party breaks.....and you return back to office.......content and relieved by the thought that there are more eyes out there with you....hunting for news....a group you simply call the "Night Reporters"

Posted by George Koshy at 03 : 18 hrs

Friday, January 27, 2006

My life as an investment banker - Rediff.com

My life as an investment banker
Rohan Siddhu December 19, 2005
I was so sure I wanted to be a pilot. Nothing was going to change my mind.

My family disapproved. Totally. My grandfather, a fabulously rich octogenarian, was a chartered accountant. He ran his own firm along with my dad, and wanted the next generation to continue in his footsteps. He frowned incessantly whenever I mentioned my childhood dream. Then my older brother, whom I idolised (then, not now), became a CA. That did it. I followed suit. Partly, because I wanted to follow my brother's footsteps. Partly, because I was afraid I would be cut off from the family inheritance. I also figured I would be more ambitious if I worked hard enough at buying my own private aircraft instead of flying someone else's.

A few months into the job, I was miserable. I realised being a CA was the last thing I wanted to do. That's when I saw Wall Street. A wild film on an ambitious young trader in the eighties in New York. Boy, I loved that movie. 'Greed is good' is what Michael Douglas inculcated in me. I saw the swank apartment Charlie Sheen lived in with his perfect woman and I thought, that's the life I want.

Forget the family inheritance, I decided. I don't need it.

I got in touch with a family friend and asked him to help me get a job as an investment banker. After a dozen interviews, where I had close encounters with the inflated egos of other investment bankers, I managed to get myself a job.

I think my success at landing the job lay solely in my ability to look most interested as the guys interviewing me spoke blatantly about their lives and the deals they clinched.

My new life had begun.

The good, the bad and the ugly

I soon discovered that I did not land myself a job but a 24/7 personality referred to as the investment banker. I was like a doctor on call. My day would typically start by waking up early morning to chat with a client in Hong Kong. And I ended the day staying up really late to chat with the one from US. In between, my life was interspersed with mundane tasks of presentations and photocopying, with miniscule doses of financial engineering and power games.

Let me explain.

Investment bankers are experts at calculating what a business is worth. To arrive at this figure, they use something known as the Discounted Cash Flow method. For the uninitiated, this is a valuation method used to estimate the attractiveness of an investment opportunity. It is such a sensitive tool that, by just changing a variable or assumption, you would be able to get a completely different figure. You could value a company at Rs 100 crore or Rs 1,000 crore.

It actually was up to me!

This made me feel supremely important, despite the fact that I had to pore over coma-inducing spread sheets. And, of course, when you discuss mergers and acquisitions, you only meet with the big brass. Getting a handshake from these guys and having them listen to my every word and detailed analysis would set my adrenaline soaring.

Our job also entailed raising capital (money) for companies.This was not much fun. I had to dress up a company and then present it to private equity investors or venture capitalists and even the public, if we were floating Initial Public Offerings.

Basically, we had to sell a company, whether we truly believed in it or not. Often, I found myself pushing deals with clients that I knew would not work. I became a salesman to the core.

Investment bankers also excel in paperwork.Whether it was a prospectus for an IPO or whatever deal, we had to ensure that the figures were accurate and the language legally perfect. We had to scrutinise every word and then make hundreds of photocopies (alright, I am exaggerating, but only slightly).

And, if it was merger or acquisition that we were working on, the paperwork assumed such gigantic proportions that a room had to be hired -- called the data room -- whose sole purpose was to store the photocopies.

There were periods when I managed to catch just four hours of sleep daily.

Whoever said that investment banking is not about money but about the game of acquiring it (a popular saying among investment bankers) was lying through his teeth.
It's all about the money, honey

What I loved about the job was the money.The salaries and bonuses were obscenely luring. (A fresh MBA, with absolutely no job experience, could earn between Rs 3,00,000-Rs 6,00,000 per annum (the latter if you are from a top-notch business school like the IIMs).)The salaries gave purpose to my life and the bonuses (which could go up to three to five times the annual salary) made up for the crap I had to put up with. And, yes, believe me, there was lots of crap.
Let me tell you something about the bonuses.

Like I mentioned earlier, it can be breathtakingly inflated figure. To get it, you have to do two things.

The first: Work like a dog to contribute to the profits.
If you are passionate about teamwork, investment banking is certainly not the place for you. It is more of a dog-eat-dog culture. You are on your own. Since you are paid according to the deals you cut, it works out to be a very individualistic environment with everyone jockeying for a large slice of the bonus cake.

The second: Suck up to your boss.
That's right. Be a sycophant, even if he is insufferable.
Smile at him.
Say the right things.
Nod when he makes a good point.
Don't disagree too much when he does not.
Grovel at his feet.
Your bonus is not going to be calculated according to some predetermined formula. It is solely dependent on your boss' whims and fancies.

I'm sorry, but...
After my first year, I looked forward to the bonus with glee. I was the 'hot new kid' on the block, responsible for getting in 80% of all new business in the past year. One morning, my boss calls me and tells me he is quitting. A new guy would be taking his place. Come bonus time, the 'new guy' calls me in for a chat.

"I believe you have done really well in the past year," he starts.
I liked that beginning.
"Unfortunately, since I have just joined, it would not be fair for me to judge your performance or those of your colleagues." Warning bells began clanging in my head. "So I am afraid, all bonuses are going to be equal this year."

I headed to the nearest pub to drown my sorrows.

The following year, I was totally demotivated (can you blame me?). Subsequently, I did not get in that much of business.Come bonus time, he pompously tells me that he cannot give me a huge bonus since I did not work as well as was reported earlier.

Hit the pub again.

The travelling sucks. Big time!
A friend once told me the easiest way to spot an investment banker in the lobby of a five-star hotel is to look for those who look sleepless and harried. If you ever meet an investment banker who says that he/ she loves the travelling, feel free to punch him/ her in the face. Hard!The first time you travel, it is nice. The second time too. Maybe even the third. The fourth time it is tolerable. After that, it's a drag. You not only have to constantly travel all around the country, you even have to travel abroad. If that sounds cool, consider yourself walking around like a zombie at some airport, looking at the ticket to figure out where you are even as your biological clock frantically tries to adjust to crossing three time zones in two days.

Has anyone seen my social life?
The travelling and the ridiculous working hours ensured that my social life was a memory of the past. It dropped in inverse proportion to my salary. Moreover, there was no one interesting in office to hang around with. In fact, the first thing that hit me when I walked into the office on my very first day was the negligible amount of women. Where were the women? Did they not want to be investment bankers?

The office was full of men: all types, the young, the balding, the paunchy relics.So, when my trader friend invited me to his sister's birthday bash, I jumped at it.

Finally, I cornered a nice girl. "Hi, My name's Rohan. I'm an investment banker."
"How nice," was her retort.
That's it? How nice?
Obviously, she had no idea who (or what) an investment banker is.

Later, I was later told this was one of the worst pick-up lines in the world. After a fairly disastrous attempt at polite conversation, I was kind of relieved my friend sauntered over to join us.

"I'm a stock trader," was all he had to say to get the glint in her eyes.
"Wow! That's so cool! Your job must be so exciting!"

Hell! Why did I take this job?

Does that mean I quit?
Right now, I am on a sabbatical in Spain. Will I go back? I think so (have not figured out what else to do). After all, the paycheck gives me purpose and the bonus makes up for the crap.
And, hey, on my own I can't afford to fly business class, live in executive suites in five-star hotels, holiday abroad every year and eat in the swankiest and most expensive restaurants in town. That, along with the money, is the prime motivator as to why I am an investment banker.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

The Man Who Invented Management BUSINESSWEEK

The Man Who Invented Management
Why Peter Drucker's ideas still matter
Businessweek
November 28,1995
Little more than six months ago, I was sitting within a foot of Peter F. Drucker's right ear -- the one he could still hear from -- in the living room of his modest home in Claremont, Calif. Even that close, I had to shout my questions to him, often eliciting a "What?" rather than an answer. Yet when he absorbed my words, his mind remained vigorous even as his body was failing.

He had often said that at his age "one doesn't pray for a long life but for an easy death." Since then he had struggled through a series of ailments, from life-threatening abdominal cancer to a broken hip. Oversize hearing aids plugged into both ears, he had a pacemaker in his chest and needed a walker to get around his ranch home on Wellesley Drive. Over 20-plus years, I often met or spoke to Drucker in the course of reporting any number of business and management stories.

On that spring morning in April, in black cotton slippers and socks that barely covered his ankles, Drucker seemed unusually frail and tired -- not at all in a mood to ponder his legacy. "I'm not very introspective," he protested in his familiar guttural baritone, thick with the accent of his native Austria. "I don't know. What I would say is I helped a few good people be effective in doing the right things."

Let others now speak for Drucker, who died peacefully in his sleep at home on Nov. 11 at age 95, eight days shy of his 96th birthday:"The world knows he was the greatest management thinker of the last century," Jack Welch, former chairman of General Electric Co. (), said after Drucker's death.

"He was the creator and inventor of modern management," said management guru Tom Peters. "In the early 1950s, nobody had a tool kit to manage these incredibly complex organizations that had gone out of control. Drucker was the first person to give us a handbook for that."

Adds Intel Corp. () co-founder Andrew S. Grove: "Like many philosophers, he spoke in plain language that resonated with ordinary managers. Consequently, simple statements from him have influenced untold numbers of daily actions; they did mine over decades."

The story of Peter Drucker is the story of management itself. It's the story of the rise of the modern corporation and the managers who organize work. Without his analysis it's almost impossible to imagine the rise of dispersed, globe-spanning corporations.

But it's also the story of Drucker's own rising disenchantment with capitalism in the late 20th century that seemed to reward greed as easily as it did performance. Drucker was sickened by the excessive riches awarded to mediocre executives even as they slashed the ranks of ordinary workers. And as he entered his 10th decade, there were some in corporations and academia who said his time had passed. Others said he grew sloppy with the facts. Meanwhile, new generations of management gurus and pundits, many of whom grew rich off books and speaking tours, superseded him. The doubt and disillusionment with business that Drucker expressed in his later years caused him to turn away from the corporation and instead offer his advice to the nonprofit sector. It seemed an acknowledgment that business and management had somehow failed him.

But Drucker's tale is not mere history. Whether it's recognized or not, the organization and practice of management today is derived largely from the thinking of Peter Drucker. His teachings form a blueprint for every thinking leader (page 106). In a world of quick fixes and glib explanations, a world of fads and simplistic PowerPoint lessons, he understood that the job of leading people and institutions is filled with complexity. He taught generations of managers the importance of picking the best people, of focusing on opportunities and not problems, of getting on the same side of the desk as your customer, of the need to understand your competitive advantages, and to continue to refine them. He believed that talented people were the essential ingredient of every successful enterprise.

RENAISSANCE MAN
Well before his death, before the almost obligatory accolades poured in, Drucker had already become a legend, of course. He was the guru's guru, a sage, kibitzer, doyen, and gadfly of business, all in one. He had moved fluidly among his various roles as journalist, professor, historian, economics commentator, and raconteur. Over his 95 prolific years, he had been a true Renaissance man, a teacher of religion, philosophy, political science, and Asian art, even a novelist. But his most important contribution, clearly, was in business. What John Maynard Keynes is to economics or W. Edwards Deming to quality, Drucker is to management.

After witnessing the oppression of the Nazi regime, he found great hope in the possibilities of the modern corporation to build communities and provide meaning for the people who worked in them. For the next 50 years he would train his intellect on helping companies live up to those lofty possibilities. He was always able to discern trends -- sometimes 20 years or more before they were visible to anyone else. "It is frustratingly difficult to cite a significant modern management concept that was not first articulated, if not invented, by Drucker," says James O'Toole, the management author and University of Southern California professor. "I say that with both awe and dismay." In the course of his long career, Drucker consulted for the most celebrated CEOs of his era, from Alfred P. Sloan Jr. of General Motors Corp. () to Grove of Intel.

-- It was Drucker who introduced the idea of decentralization -- in the 1940s -- which became a bedrock principle for virtually every large organization in the world.
-- He was the first to assert -- in the 1950s -- that workers should be treated as assets, not as liabilities to be eliminated.
-- He originated the view of the corporation as a human community -- again, in the 1950s -- built on trust and respect for the worker and not just a profit-making machine, a perspective that won Drucker an almost godlike reverence among the Japanese.
-- He first made clear -- still the '50s -- that there is "no business without a customer," a simple notion that ushered in a new marketing mind-set.
-- He argued in the 1960s -- long before others -- for the importance of substance over style, for institutionalized practices over charismatic, cult leaders.
-- And it was Drucker again who wrote about the contribution of knowledge workers -- in the 1970s -- long before anyone knew or understood how knowledge would trump raw material as the essential capital of the New Economy.

Drucker made observation his life's work, gleaning deceptively simple ideas that often elicited startling results. Shortly after Welch became CEO of General Electric in 1981, for example, he sat down with Drucker at the company's New York headquarters. Drucker posed two questions that arguably changed the course of Welch's tenure: "If you weren't already in a business, would you enter it today?" he asked. "And if the answer is no, what are you going to do about it?"

Those questions led Welch to his first big transformative idea: that every business under the GE umbrella had to be either No. 1 or No. 2 in its class. If not, Welch decreed that the business would have to be fixed, sold, or closed. It was the core strategy that helped Welch remake GE into one of the most successful American corporations of the past 25 years.

Drucker's work at GE is instructive. It was never his style to bring CEOs clear, concise answers to their problems but rather to frame the questions that could uncover the larger issues standing in the way of performance. "My job," he once lectured a consulting client, "is to ask questions. It's your job to provide answers." Says Dan Lufkin, a co-founder of investment banking firm Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Inc. (), who often consulted with Drucker in the 1960s: "He would never give you an answer. That was frustrating for a while. But while it required a little more brain matter, it was enormously helpful to us. After you spent time with him, you really admired him not only for the quality of his thinking but for his foresight, which was amazing. He was way ahead of the curve on major trends."

Drucker's mind was an itinerant thing, able to wander in minutes through a series of digressions until finally coming to some specific business point. He could unleash a monologue that would include anything from the role of money in Goethe's Faust to the story of his grandmother who played piano for Johannes Brahms, yet somehow use it to serve his point of view. "He thought in circles," says Joseph A. Maciariello, who teaches "Drucker on Management" at Claremont Graduate University.

Part of Drucker's genius lay in his ability to find patterns among seemingly unconnected disciplines. Warren Bennis, a management guru himself and longtime admirer of Drucker, says he once asked his friend how he came up with so many original insights. Drucker narrowed his eyes thoughtfully. "I learn only through listening," he said, pausing, "to myself."

Among academics, that ad hoc, nonlinear approach sometimes led to charges that Drucker just wasn't rigorous enough, that his work wasn't backed up by quantifiable research. "With all those books he wrote, I know very few professors who ever assigned one to their MBA students," says O'Toole. "Peter would never have gotten tenure in a major business school."

I first met Drucker in 1985 when I was scrambling to master my new job as management editor at BusinessWeek. He invited me to Estes Park, Colo., where he and his wife, Doris, often spent summers in a log cabin, part of a YWCA camp. I remember him counseling me to drink lots of water, ingest a super dose of vitamin C, and take it easy to adjust to the high altitude. I spent two days getting to know Drucker and his work. We had breakfast, lunch, and dinner together. We hiked the trails of the camp. And I became intimately familiar with his remarkable story.

Born in Austria in 1909 into a highly educated professional family, he seemed destined for some kind of greatness. The Vienna that Drucker knew had been a cultural and economic hub, and his parents were in the thick of it. Sigmund Freud ate lunch at the same cooperative restaurant as the Druckers and vacationed near the same Alpine lake. When Drucker first met Freud at the age of eight, his father told him: "Remember, today you have just met the most important man in Austria and perhaps in Europe." Many evenings his parents, Adolph and Caroline, would gather the intellectual elite in the drawing room of their Vienna home for wide-ranging discussions of medicine, politics, or music. Peter absorbed not merely their content but worldliness and a style of expression.

When Hitler organized his first Nazi meeting in Berlin in 1927, Drucker, raised a Protestant, was in Germany, studying law at the University of Frankfurt. He attended classes taught by Keynes and Joseph Schumpeter. As a student, a clerk in a Hamburg export firm, and a securities analyst in a Frankfurt merchant bank, he lived through the years of Hitler's emergence, recognizing early the menace of centralized power. When his essay on Friedrich Julius Stahl, a leading German conservative philosopher, was published as a pamphlet in 1933, it so offended the Nazis that the pamphlet was banned and burned. A second Drucker pamphlet, Die Judenfrage in Deutschland, or The Jewish Question in Germany, published four years later, suffered the same fate. The only surviving copy sits in a folder in the Austrian National Archives with a swastika stamped on it.

Drucker immigrated to London shortly after Hitler became Chancellor, taking a job as an economist at a London bank while continuing to write and to study economics. He came to America in 1937 as a correspondent for a group of British newspapers, along with his new wife, Doris, whom he had met in Frankfurt. "America was terribly exciting," remembered Drucker. "In Europe the only hope was to go back to 1913. In this country everyone looked forward."

So did Drucker. He taught part time at Sarah Lawrence College before joining the faculty at Bennington College in Vermont. He could be a difficult taskmaster. One Bennington student recalled that Drucker said her paper "resembled turnips sprinkled with parsley. I could wring his fat frog-like neck," she wrote in a letter to her parents. "Unfortunately, he is a very brilliant and famous man. He has at least taught me something."

Drucker was a professor of politics and philosophy at Bennington when he was given the opportunity to study General Motors in 1945, the first time he peeked inside the corporation. His examination led to the publication of his groundbreaking book, Concept of the Corporation, and his decision, in 1950, to attach himself to New York University's Graduate School of Business. It was around this time that Drucker heard Schumpeter, then at Harvard University, say: "I know that it is not enough to be remembered for books and theories. One does not make a difference unless it is a difference in people's lives."

CREATING A DISCIPLINE
He took Schumpeter's advice to heart, beginning a career in consulting while continuing his life as a teacher and writer. Drucker's most famous text, The Practice of Management, published in 1954, laid out the American corporation like a well-dissected frog in a college laboratory, with chapter headings such as "What is a Business?" and "Managing Growth." It became his first popular book about management, and its title was, in effect, a manifesto. He was saying that management was not a science or an art. It was a profession, like medicine or law. It was about getting the very best out of people. As he himself put it: "I wrote The Practice of Management because there was no book on management. I had been working for 10 years consulting and teaching, and there simply was nothing or very little. So I kind of sat down and wrote it, very conscious of the fact that I was laying the foundations of a discipline."

Drucker taught at NYU for 21 years -- and his executive classes became so popular that they were held in a nearby gym where the swimming pool was drained and covered so hundreds of folding chairs could be set up. Drucker moved to California in 1971 to become a professor of social sciences and management at Claremont Graduate School, as it was known then. But he was always thought to be an outsider -- a writer, not a scholar -- who was largely ignored by the business schools. Tom Peters says he earned two advanced degrees, including a PhD in business, without once studying Drucker or reading a single book written by him. Even some of Drucker's colleagues at NYU had fought against awarding him tenure because his ideas were not the result of rigorous academic research. For years professors at the most elite business schools said they didn't bother to read Drucker because they found him superficial. And in the years before Drucker's death even the dean of the Peter F. Drucker Graduate School of Management at Claremont said: "This is a brand in decline."

In the 1980s he began to have grave doubts about business and even capitalism itself. He no longer saw the corporation as an ideal space to create community. In fact, he saw nearly the opposite: a place where self-interest had triumphed over the egalitarian principles he long championed. In both his writings and speeches, Drucker emerged as one of Corporate America's most important critics. When conglomerates were the rage, he preached against reckless mergers and acquisitions. When executives were engaged in empire-building, he argued against excess staff and the inefficiencies of numerous "assistants to." In a 1984 essay he persuasively argued that CEO pay had rocketed out of control and implored boards to hold CEO compensation to no more than 20 times what the rank and file made. What particularly enraged him was the tendency of corporate managers to reap massive earnings while firing thousands of their workers. "This is morally and socially unforgivable," wrote Drucker, "and we will pay a heavy price for it."

The hostile takeovers of the 1980s, a period that revisionists now say was essential to improve American efficiency and productivity, was for Drucker "the final failure of corporate capitalism." He then likened Wall Street traders to "Balkan peasants stealing each other's sheep" or "pigs gorging themselves at the trough." He maintained that multimillion-dollar severance packages had perverted management's ability to look out for anything but itself. "When you have golden parachutes," he told one journalist, "you have created incentives for management to collude with the raiders." At one point, Drucker was so put off by American corporate values that he was moved to say that, "although I believe in the free market, I have serious reservations about capitalism."

We tend to think of Drucker as forever old, a gnomic and mysterious elder. At least I always did. His speech, always slow and measured, was forever accented in that commanding Viennese. His wisdom could not have come from anyone who was young. So it's easy to forget his dashing youth, his long devotion to one woman and their four children (until the end, Drucker still greeted his wife of 71 years with an effusive "Hello, my darling!"), or even his deliciously self-deprecating sense of play.

During his early consulting work with DLJ, the partners flew out to California to meet with Drucker at home. After one of his famously meandering monologues, Drucker thought everyone needed a break.

"Well, boys," he said, "why don't we relax for a few minutes? Let's go for a swim."

The executives explained that they hadn't brought their swimming trunks.

"You don't need swimming suits because it's just men here today," replied Drucker.

"And we took off our clothes and went skinny-dipping in his pool," recalls Charles Ellis, who was with the group.

Surely, Drucker never fit into the buttoned-down stereotype of a management consultant. He always favored bright colors: a bottle-green shirt, a knit tie, a royal blue jacket with a blue-on-blue shirt, or simply a woolen flannel shirt and tan trousers. Drucker always worked from a home office filled with books and classical records on shelves that groaned under their weight. He never had a secretary and usually handled the fax machine and answered the telephone himself -- he was something of a phone addict, he admitted.

PRIVACY PREVAILS
Yet Drucker also was an intensely private man, revealing little of his personal life, even in his own autobiography, Adventures of a Bystander, the book he told me was his favorite of them all. Not surprisingly, perhaps, the Drucker Archives at Claremont Graduate University contain only one personal letter from his wife to him. Doris had clipped two images from a 1950s-era newspaper, one of a handsome man in a plaid robe, fresh from a good night's sleep, another of a couple in love, man and woman staring into each other's eyes, over a late evening snack. She glued each black-and-white image onto a flimsy piece of typing paper and wrote the words: "I love you in the morning when things are kind of frantic. I love you in the evening when things are more romantic." It is undated and unsigned.

It was Doris, in her own unpublished memoir, who told the story of how she once locked Drucker in a London coal cellar to hide him from her disapproving mother. As Doris' mother turned the house upside down in a frantic search for a man she thought was sleeping with her daughter, Peter spent the better part of the night crouched in a cold, dark hole. Doris' mother had long hoped her daughter would someday marry a Rothschild or a German of high social standing. The last thing she wanted was for her to marry a light-in-the-pocket Austrian.

In his later years, as his health weakened, so did Drucker's magnetic pull. Although he maintained a coterie of corporate followers, he increasingly turned his attention to nonprofit leaders, from Frances Hesselbein of the Girl Scouts of the USA to Rick Warren, founding pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif. Warren, author of The Purpose-Driven Life, considered Drucker a mentor. "Drucker told me: 'The function of management in a church is to make the church more churchlike, not more businesslike. It's to allow you to do what your mission is,"' Warren said. "Business was just a starting point from which he had this platform to influence leaders of all different kinds."

Still, it was clear Drucker cared deeply about how he would be remembered. He tried in 1990 to discredit and quash an admiring biography of quality guru Deming, whom he seemed to consider a rival. And when Professor O'Toole assessed the influence of Drucker's landmark 1945 study on General Motors, he concluded that the guru not only had had no impact on GM but also became persona non grata at the company for nearly half a century. "I sent it to Peter, and he spent hours going over it with me," recalls O'Toole. "He was a little unhappy with it because he didn't like the conclusion. He felt he had had a big impact at GM. I thought that was either very generous of Peter or else he was kidding himself."

During the same period, Drucker, then 80 years old, penned a severely flawed foreword for a new edition of Alfred Sloan's My Years with General Motors. In one passage, Drucker quotes Sloan as saying that the death of his younger brother Raymond was "the greatest personal tragedy in my life." Raymond, however, died 17 years after Alfred. In another section, Drucker noted that the publication of the book had been delayed because Sloan "refused to publish as long as any of the GM people mentioned in the book was still alive. On the day of the death of the last living person mentioned in the book, Sloan released it for publication," wrote Drucker. In fact, Sloan generously heaped praise on 14 colleagues in the preface of his book, and all were still alive when My Years with General Motors was first published.

Whether the mistakes were a result of sloppiness or his declining intellectual power is not clear. But Drucker was no longer at the top of his game. The dean of the Drucker school, Cornelis de Kluyver, had reason to believe that Drucker's influence was on the wane -- the school was having difficulty attracting big money from potential donors. To gain a $20 million gift for its puny endowment, de Kluyver agreed in 2003 to put another name on the school, that of Masatoshi Ito, the founder of Ito-Yokado Group, owner of 7-Eleven stores in Japan and North America. Students protested, even marching outside the dean's office toting placards decrying the change. An ailing Drucker volunteered to speak directly to the students. "I consider it quite likely that three years after my death my name will be of absolutely no advantage," he told them. "If you can get 10 million bucks by taking my name off, more power to you."

In April, during our last meeting, I asked Drucker what he had been up to lately. "Not very much," he replied. "I have been putting things in order, slowly. I am reasonably sure that I am not going to write another book. I just don't have the energy. My desk is a mess, and I can't find anything."

I almost felt guilty for having asked the question, so I praised his work, the 38 books, the countless essays and articles, the consulting gigs, his widespread influence on so many of the world's most celebrated leaders. But he was agitated, even dismissive, of much of his accomplishment.

"I did my best work early on -- in the 1950s. Since then it's marginal. O.K.? What else do you have?"

I pressed the nonagenarian for more reflection, more introspection. "Look," he sighed, "I'm totally uninteresting. I'm a writer, and writers don't have interesting lives. My books, my work, yes. That's different."
By John A. Byrne, with Lindsey Gerdes in New York