My experience with public sector- IT IN PUBLIC SECTOR-1

Yes I agree that L1 is pending but something happened and it provoked me to deal with PSU - IT first. Hey this IT is same the hyped software IT not the boring income tax IT.

"Oh cmon we too have intranet facilities, we can send mails, we can receive mails, that means we have Ids........so we also need an IT dept. Obviously we have an IT dept. to make email Ids, send salary emails to each employee, and to fill IT returns online(Now this was income tax), to make a database of all this information about an employee, to make links for different depts on the intranet(as if a new dept mushrooms up every week), you would be astonished to know, they now have made the filling of tour advance application, claims and even leave application online, (how much of it is updated is different matter), and also to provide IT related hardware, services related to that, it is a mammoth task dear you wont understand.

Oh so it seems a joke to you......it itself is a big task...and then there is a corporate IT that also deals with how to maintain internet communication at sites, I mean power plant. A lot of internet connectivity is required between plants and their substations, their communnication architecture, communication protocol etc. "

And after this it became difficult to explain the work of IT dept. in PSU for me to an IT based friend of mine, further being an ex-IT person now working in PSU it felt like I was fooling myself about, giving all these explanations. Thankfully the friend didnt ask me how does the IT dept. manage the misuse of internet during working hours....how embarassing it would have been to tell that we could only access intranet and irctc.co.in, sbi, airline sites. The hardworking IT dept has banned internet access upto E6 level that is DGM level so that there is no need to monitor the sites being used etc.

At times I wonder how and when they came to this figure of E6, let it be for the ED only, or why even for him or her also, why do they need?? As far as I know people at higher level are more hooked to share trading and such activities not the entry level engineers, but then who has got time to monitor all this. OHK......cricket is an all generation passion, irrespective of caste and creed, age and designation, then why only E0 to E5 are prohibited from it, hmmmm.....may be the E6 ones deserve that after such long years of hardwork and contributions to the organisation......When will I reach E6???? Some 20 years, till then without net!!!!! Cmon its public sector I knew it isnt it?(to be continued)

When a No says it all (continued)

........in these 27 years of my life, the most artful thing and the most difficult thing that I have experienced is to how to say No in a way to solve my problem comfortably wihout creating nuisance of hurting feelings, ego, etc. Saying no involves a lot of manners, attitude, proper toning, timing and so much that at times I wondered why isnt there any guide on how to say No. I have had a small stint with software firm, where they are very particular about communication skills, how to say what and when and to whom, but they never touched the issue of how to say an effective No. I wonder whether anyone had ever thought so much about saying No but I have many times seen people around me troubled about how to say no to any uncomfortable situation they are stuck in. I have seen people panicking about the consequences of saying no and then feeling relaxed once they have done the excercise of saying no successfully and even regretting their decision of saying no if they have failed in the exercise.At times I even feel that there could be psychological studies on the human nature based on their comfort level in saying no to different situations. In my view a person who is comfortable saying no, is decisive and clear about himself. But if pretty detailed study is done a person always saying No  can also be negative responsing, introvert, strongly insecure about future, and reluctant to changes and challenges. It all depends to what a person say no, how often a person say no, how easily a person say no. I can say this because I have in my knowledge both type of people. One of them is my own mother, a very decisive woman, she never had worries saying no to things she didnt like but she isnt negative, and another one is a neighbour and colleague, who always has a no in answer to any plan, any new thing to be tried, any excursion trip ever planned, any gathering ever thought about, any activity ever thought since I know her. It may sound funny but if I'll ever have a time I would love to conduct a study on how people say no,what all they go through while saying no, how often they say no, and then analyse their behavior and would relate them to derive a conclusion. I strongly believe there must be some link in a person's nature and his ability to say no to different situations. After all a no says it all. It makes a decision, it implies negative attitude, it is firm, it ends the for and against debate going on in mind and it has a lastin effect on person addressed. A yes is seldom remembered remembered but a NO is engraved on heart and reaches deep inside through ear. A person may always be happy about his job, but he never forgets the job where he was rejected even if what he is doing is better than the one where he was told a no, he may be having the best woman in his life but he would never forget the proposal that was simply told a big no. No wonder a No says it all.

My experience with Public Sector- L1 PHENOMENA

TO BE POSTED SOON.................

My experience with public sector- TURNOVER MANIA

The organisation I am employed with has many sister units. Each unit has its own work culture in terms of hierchical attitude, facilities, timings, behaviour towards new entrants, level of sincerity, products manufactured, industry served etc. infact a of plethora of differences between them and amongst them but a common thread of love runs through all these units, no not for the organisation as a whole but for the turnover, that again not of the organisation but for the respective unit to which the employee belongs, again this employee is not just any employee but the head of the unit he or she is concerned with. If just any employee is considered he or she is only concerned about the turnover of his or own dept. Anyways let it be, one cannot bother oneself for the whole world, there's lot under your chair to be worried about rather than looking under someone else'. But the thing that greatly amuses me and that I have experienced largely is the intense ownership feeling in each employee for his or her unit so much so that they have forgotten to belong to the whole organisation. In this span of one year I came across people of at least four units, and have heard pride in their words when they disclose about their units and then look down upon me when I do not flaunt the name of my unit with the same pride. Infact this difference among units is an issue big enough to be respected with a complete article on it. At present lets see what turnover means:
Some nice definitions of turnover are given in these links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnover

http://www.investorwords.com/5094/turnover.html

All I understood is what the company earns in a fixed period of time may be quarterly, halfyearly or anually is termed as turnover. Its the worth of the business done by the firm in a fixed time. No wonder the mania attached to it, the more the better. So far so good, but thats not all, the problem is not the turnover but that strong inherent desire to show that the target of turnover is achieved, by hook or crook, that is a different matter. And mind the words the "the strong inherent desire to show...." details need not be mentioned. Again no issues setting turnover targets and achieving them but the hook or crook thing does matters. There is a statement in Great Expectations by Charles Dickens " If you can never get oncommon by being hooked you can never get to it by being crooked.".

In an organisation such as mine, divided into many units a competition sort of is developed amongst units for achieving highest turnover, that is in turn to achieve as much possible turnover for the organisation as a whole. Here I strongly believe in this 'take care of your own home' policy of the organisation because it was never meant to divivde the organisation into caste and creed just like God never meant human beings to be divided into caste and creed and neither this policy was meant to creat an ugly cat race amongst the units for the turnover targets.Instead it was meant for better management and to develop a healthy competitve environment where each unit develop and imparts its learning to other and thereby the whole organisation develops, a healthy group study kind of thing. But alas sisters rarely do a group study, may be thats why they are called sister units. Finally what all this mayhem has resulted in, is each unit only trying to set up as higher targets as possible and achieve them anyhow or atleast somehow show that they are achieved and prove the other down, if not down atleast not let anyone come ahead.

One aspect of this whole thing is competition with private sector, agreed that there is tough competition but then public sector is by public, born of public's money, we owe certain responsibility that private sector dosent. Even if this moral aspect is ignored, after all it's business, lets ponder are we actually competing private sector in this way, are we competing in quality, deadlines etc. Or just fooling ourselves? Forget all this only ask just any unit head, is the target really achieved and look into his eyes! There is just one madness to show that the much coveted turnover figure is achieved every year, every quarter and now every month, and so the only thing in mind is the turnover of this month, what all manipualtion is to be done to achieve that, what inspections are to be given waiver, what all procedures can be misused to show that the turnover is finally achieved. Its something like a crash diet course to achieve the much coveted figure. But then it should be remembered once the crash diet is over the ugly fat returns and becomes all the more rigid to remove from the body. Similarly it will become difficult to achieve the target year by year if we keep on inclining towards the these short term targets. One should not forget the example of banks that crashed because they were only worried about the month's target and no planning was done for the rainy day.

The most worrisome matter is that this attitude seems to be at its peak when the intake of new executives is at its peak. So what are they being taught? Compromise on engineering, manipulate procedures, waiver the inspections do anything but achieve the turnover. How long will an organisation go with such a taskforce, with this kind of nurturing of the future by the seniors? But the ones sitting on the high seat of responsiblity are only worried about the turnover achievement during their tenure. There are such funny instances of turnover mania amogst seniors, it amuses to hear when a dept head asks to get an inspection call a day or two after the drawings are just approved or when a senior level person asks to clear the two hundred sheet drawings in just one day, the specifications for equipments that will run the whole thermal powerplant are told to be prepared like two minute maggi noodles, indents are told to be issued like daily newspapers. When an engineer goes for inspection he is rarely told to inspect thoroughly and not to clear the material unless it is according to the specification, instead he is given a deadline to clear the material and get the dispatch done anyhow before the month end. The gross neglect of pure engineering and procedures is as dangerous as slow poison. But then since it is slow each dept head, unit head feels the death wont come in my tenure at least. In such big engineering organisations as mine, its not the turnover in one's tenure that will be remembered but the value addition done by each indivdual, the contribution and strategies developed to make the organistion stand the doom's day even after the person is gone. Those who are sitting up there must realise that their days in the organisation may be few and they may only be worried about the turnover, but if the organisation fails a few years after there farewell it is they who could not nurture it during their tenure and if the organisation stands strong long after they are gone it was they who laid its foundation. Its not the turnover that will keep the organisation going but the strong and standardised process and pure engineering with strict adherence to quality measures that will help the organise drive through thick and thin.