KUNDIL VEENA CHUNDELI - LESSONS IN LEADERSHIP (Corporate and others)

 

“Kundil Veena Chundeli” is in Malayalam and means “mouse that fell in a ditch.

“History repeats itself” is an idiom that finds frequent mention nowadays. Both sides, especially in animated television discussions that become no-holds-barred debates, use it at will. The events that unfold daily across the world somehow give me the impression that the contemporary is often a repetition of the past, and we, in our own little ways, are all part of this great drama. To make things clearer, let me share a Malayalam story I learned as a child in the second or third grade. The story seems to repeat endlessly, though the characters keep changing. Let me narrate the story, giving it a contemporary flavour.

The story

Once upon a time, a mouse landed up in a kitchen in search of food. Without much problem, he found two “neyyappams” (a Malayali sweet and my childhood favourite) wrapped in a newspaper. Without waiting to eat, he picked up the packet and walked. He wanted to reach home and share the food with his children. The package was bigger than him, and naturally, holding it in his mouth, it blocked his sight. Not the one to give up, he walked, though blinded. Soon enough, he fell and fell into a deep ditch. He tried to climb out of the ditch but could not. Oblivious to his plight, the world outside carried on. He could, however, hear other animals walking past the ditch far above him. Then an idea struck him. He pretended to read the newspaper and read it aloud. 

“The sky is about to fall, and those who fear for life run and hide in some deep ditch,” he read it at the top of his voice from the depths of the pit. He kept repeating the same thing again.

A tiger, with a keen sense of hearing and smell, walking by, heard the mouse. “What?” He looked up at the sky. It was still there. He looked into the ditch and saw the mouse reading the newspaper. 

“Is it true? Is the sky going to fall?” He asked the mouse. 

“It is true. You are in danger. It is written here in the paper. Save yourself.” 

“How?”

“Are you deaf? Are you dumb? I just read this paper for you. Jump into a deep ditch,” replied the mouse and continued to pretend to read the paper. 

Who does not fear for life? “Can I come in?” asked the tiger. 

“Yeah. You and I are in danger. Jump in,” replied the mouse.

The Tiger jumped into the ditch to save his life. Worse, he was unlettered and was ashamed that he could not read, but a mouse could. But he was very grateful to the mouse, for he had used his wisdom to save another fellow forester from death without seeking anything in return. The mouse kept reading the message aloud again and again.

“Why are you repeating the message?” asked the tiger.

“Why? I am not selfish. I know the threat and know how to get out of it. Don't you want to save our brothers and sisters in the forest? Humans will take care of themselves.”

The tiger was overcome with remorse. In repentance, he started repeating what the mouse said. Obviously, the tiger had a bigger roar. All the animals in the jungle heard it and started running helter-skelter. Soon, the ditch was filled with various animals from the forest. The elephant followed. Others, one by one, big and small, different species, all united in their anxiety and grief, and hoping to save their own lives, joined them. Slowly, the ditch started getting filled up, and everyone was announcing that the sky was about to fall. After all, the community was under threat. The mouse continued with his pretend he was reading as others looked at him in awe. He stopped reading aloud because others had started parroting it for him, much louder and more convincing than he could be.  

A monkey was passing by and heard the commotion. He also wanted to join, but the mouse would let nothing of that sort happen.  “This place is already full. You go and find some other place,” the mouse commanded. After all, he was in command! Everyone there had unquestioningly accepted his wisdom and saw him as their saviour and supreme leader. Moreover, he had access to the scripture, and others did not know how to read. “Must be a divine gift,” they thought when they saw the mouse silently reading. Nobody questioned how he came to possess that competency. Even if someone suspected that it was a pretension, he could not speak out because the mouse had saved their lives.

“Please,” said the monkey. Nobody spoke. They all looked admiringly at the mouse, like devout disciples.

“I know you sneeze a lot, and God despises people who sneeze. Letting you in here will kill us all. Go away,” decreed the mouse.

“No. I do not sneeze. Nobody in my family sneezes,” replied the monkey.

“Are you telling us that we are lying?”  asked the mouse. He made sure that the word “us” stood out clearly from everything else. All the other animals noticed it and felt happy that the mouse was talking for all of them and taking care of everybody.

“Please,” the monkey begged, almost on the verge of tears. He did not want to die.

“Okay, we will accept you on one condition. Whosoever sneezes first will be thrown out of this ditch,” said the mouse, and looked at his audience. The word “we” was louder than everything else. All the animals were happy because their kind, benevolent, respected leader of all time included them in the decision-making. They were getting a role in governance, too!  They loved their leader. 

“Yes,” that is a fair condition,” they said in unison.

“This rule applies to everybody, even me,” declared the leader. The crowd was already grateful to their leader for having saved their life. Now he was putting himself on par with everybody in the crowd.  They loved him even more. They felt like worshipping him and seeing God in him. “Is it okay with everybody?” asked the leader.

Given a voice and the chance to be heard, everybody shouted in unison, “Yes, lord, let the rule be applied, and let us get the monkey in if he agrees to our condition.” The word “our” was distinct and had a taste of unity and brotherhood. The monkey gladly jumped into the ditch, touched the feet of the mouse, and stood on one side. Meanwhile, the other animals, out of reverence, gave the mouse a little space of his own. They also spoke amongst themselves about how they should now control entry. 

The mouse retrieved the two neyyappams he had come with, wrapped them back inside the newspaper and held them tight and close to his chest. He moved to the space allotted and declared that he had left most of the space for others. The other animals agreed, acknowledged his generosity, though they were adjusting themselves so as not to stamp on each other. They all looked at the mouse with even more admiration. One even said, “See our leader. He is simple and humble. He is carrying his own bags. He is humility personified.” 

Then what?

Finale

After some time, the mouse looked around and sneezed. The animals were shocked. They did not know what to do. They looked at each other, and then the mouse sneezed again. He was their saviour, and now what were they supposed to do? They looked up to the mouse.

The mouse stood up, looked at the others and said, “I know you all love me, but rules are rules, and for your sake, please throw me out.”

All the other animals got into a hurdle and nominated one of them to do the difficult job. The elephant was nominated because he had a trunk. He, with a heavy heart, took the mouse and flung him out of the ditch with his long trunk. The ditch was overcome with sorrow. They sat down in sorrow to discuss how magnanimous the mouse was towards all of them. Someone even started blaming the elephant for what he had done. 

“How could you do that?” The pig asked. 

“But you all told me to,” the elephant protested. Other animals started avoiding the elephant. 

The mouse hurried home happily and shared the delicacy with his children.

What happened to the others?

Your guess. 

Relevance 

How is the story relevant now? “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” (George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1903)

The story continues to be repeated right in front of us, every day in different forms. We make leaders out of mice, who peddle untruth that we accept without question. What is worse? We peddle the same untruth, believing it to be the sole truth, louder and more vigorously than its original peddler.  

Social media platforms are the deep ditches that humanity finds itself stuck in.  The platform by itself may not be harmful, but when we populate it with our version of truth, which is falsehoods, fake news, untruths, and half-truths, it becomes an all-consuming ditch. Fuelled by the desire to become the messiah, we use our fast fingers to reach out for those we know, with the messages we just received, without bothering to check the veracity of what we propagate. (My friend Colonel Reji Koduvath calls them Centre forwards) In almost every interactive social media platform, one can find virulent violence of ignorance. But people do not realise that behind all the churn is a mouse with his two neyyappams held close to his chest, waiting to sneeze and scoot. The sad truth is that we would be left to fight it amongst ourselves against each other. Sadder still, we would vehemently refuse to accept that the “mouse” got the better of us, exploiting our inherent inadequacies that incapacitate our rationality.

Caveat

The story also brings out lessons on easy steps to rewarding leadership, albeit disruptive and, in the long run, destructive. I am consciously restricting my examples to corporate leadership because nowadays, people tend to be easily offended and are actively on the lookout for reasons to be offended. Parts of a conversation or text can be consciously weaned, taken out of context and weaponised. 

Let me restate the caveat here. The examples given here are strictly about the corporate environment. Bringing similarity to any leader, dead or alive, any organisation thriving or decaying, any ideology benevolent or discriminatory, is entirely your imagination. I declare myself free of your sins!

Tips for Disruptive Leadership 

1.    Find a cause, preferably one that can be dressed up as existential. It does not need to be real. Unsubstantiated ones or hearsay will just be fine. (Threat of a competitor killing our product or company.) It must, however, give the feel that the like-minded ones are together in the “depths of the pit,” and can survive only if we stand together.

2.    That also needs an enemy, a competitor. It will be best if we can find a person or a group of persons who can be blamed. Does not matter if they did anything wrong. But blame someone anyway. It helps give a face to be aware of.

3.    Give historical references, even if there are none, or what is being given is made up. (Who cares about the truth. Make up statistics.) It will give a sense of credibility, just like the mouse reading the newspaper. Faithful followers blinded by fear of extinction will stand in support with no questions asked. 

4.    Repeat it as many times as possible, till it assumes critical mass. Otherwise, such followers may lose the sense of purpose. 

5.    Define the group to be protected and announce it till it reaches a stage where people start claiming that they are in that group and identify others as outsiders. This will give a sense of identity. Only when there are competitors can there be competition. Divisions make adversaries out of friends, and then the differences will start showing as existential threats. Within an organisation, the competition can be between production and marketing. Who cares if our aim is achieved?

6.    Pretend willingness to die for the cause. Announce that, “I will not be taking a raise,” or offer to give up some part of the pay, perks, or allowance. Nobody expects you to, and even if you take a hike or add more perks and allowances, nobody will ask if the existential cause is in place. After some time, the followers would have come so far behind you, they cannot go back. 

7.    Declare that you are willing to be crucified (Pretend. Nobody will crucify the leader) 

You think I am being sarcastic? Look around and look within your organisations and even in the households. You will be able to find it playing out.

I do not know if the story is still taught in schools. 

It is time to teach this story in all management schools.

Learning management from a mouse? 

Yeah. Let me list out a few!

Crisis Management. 

Crowd Management.

Resource Management. 

Narrative Management. 

Perception Management. 

Outcome Management. 

Effective Communication.

Team Management. 

If you are resourceful enough, you can list many more.

PS: 

Gratitude to Colonel Reji Koduvath for sharing the original story immediately after our discussion on why people want to become forwarding agents.

Picture courtesy AI

 

Qualifications or “Callification,” Selection and Retention Criterion

 

Endless Efforts

 

“Callification?” Your efforts to find out what it means in the dictionary shall go in vain. I just made it up.  Patiently read through it; you will know what it means.   

The three submersible pumps working continuously and in tandem could not fill the colony’s overhead tank. The employees kept the pump running. One pump ran dry far too long and burned itself out. The open well also ran dry. They told no one. Why should they? They had nothing to lose. I noticed the unusual activity and enquired. This had been going on for a few days. It should not have. 

I did a quick calculation of the flow rates of the pumps, the capacity of the community tank, and the tanks over the individual houses. Considering the endless efforts of the pumps, all the overhead tanks should have been filled and overflowing. It did not happen. I concluded that there must be a leak somewhere in the pipeline. The large amount of water that leaked out must have gone under the foundation of somebody's house. People seemed to be oblivious to the potential losses and damage. 

Stimulus 

“Let us check the pipeline to identify and plug the leak,” I suggested. “You have no qualifications to decide what is wrong with the water distribution system,” came the only response in the group. I was not surprised. I did not expect anything different from that individual. Did the crass response stem from deep-rooted prejudice germinated in ignorance? 

Ignorance? The individual had never bothered to ask me about my qualifications or experience. He could not have known about my academic or professional qualifications.  I did not have to revisit the lessons in fluid mechanics or applied engineering or fall back on my experiences in managing the civic amenities of one of the biggest cantonments to understand the elementary science problem. I also did not have to rack my brain to remember my lessons in missile technology. After all, determining why an overhead tank refuses to fill up is no rocket science.  

Prejudice? Prejudice is a platform internally constructed by an individual using preconceived notions about individuals, groups, or even things. The result of a “taught” or “thought” concept, it invariably becomes a subconscious driver. It influences, often negatively, everything an individual thinks, says, or does. We all carry prejudices of some sort and tend to use broad-brushed templates in our thoughts, and actions. Some amongst us make it obvious and take it to obnoxious levels. Prejudice is the result of our inability or unwillingness to reason out within ourselves. If we sit down and dispassionately analyse our conversations and the decisions we have taken over time, we should be able to spot the prejudices underpinning them. 

Many believe that the job of the Army is to only guard the country’s borders. They think that everybody in the army stands in rows along the borders preventing people from crossing over. Some feel the Army is all about marching and doing physical exercises in the morning to prepare themselves for a duel at the border and doing sentry duty. They ask, “What does the army do when there is no war?” They cannot fathom the extent to which officers of the Indian Army toil on various contemporary academic and professional subjects. Their mobility up the hierarchy ladder is largely linked to their performance in these tests. Unfortunately, such injurious ignorance is prevalent even amongst the “supposed to be” well-read.  

Response 

I was angry and instinctively wanted to respond in the same coin.  The wisdom that age, exposure, experiences, and knowledge bestowed on me forbade me from stooping down. I decided to deny traction to the foul mouth. His response, however, triggered a much deeper thought. I am, by nature, given to analyse the ‘why and how’ behind every ‘what’ I see or experience. Why did he say that? Nobody does anything once. There is always a pattern and they leave a trail. He did. 

Besides his prejudice, which I was aware of, there must be an underlying belief that prompted the response. In possession of a professional degree, he had given himself to the belief that formal qualifications define an individual’s competence and his place in society. It showed in his generally loud and contemptuous behaviour. Unfortunately, there are many like him, enslaved by similar beliefs. This misplaced belief has forced people to obtain fancy qualifications by whatever possible means. It is common knowledge that people adopt illegal means to secure academic degrees. Some go to the extent of even buying doctorate degrees. Esteem somehow seems tagged to the few letters that find a place after an individual’s name. Do formal qualifications denote competence?   

Understanding “Callification” 

The discussion does not in any manner advocate the thought that an educational degree is a waste of time. One needs to have the basic requisite educational qualification. Mere possession of the qualification, however, is no guarantee of the presence of expected skills or the aptitude to apply the acquired knowledge. If an educational degree defines comparable competence, two equally qualified professionals like chefs, doctors, economists, fashion designers, lawyers, or musicians, should all demonstrate comparable performance. This is not the case. 

Everyone gets the initial foothold into a profession using the few letters representing a mandated educational degree. It may also be the inescapable requisite for career progression. Degrees merely indicate that the person has cleared a qualifying examination, by whatever means. The marks obtained by the person do not in any manner indicate his proficiency. It merely shows how well he fared in recalling answers to the questions, which in turn was anyway a matter of probability. This gives the individual the required ‘qualification’ to secure entry to an organisation or a job. Once an entry has been obtained, they need to perform in the role assigned. In performance, the difference between grain and chaff lies in “callification.” Without callification, however, smart one may be, one cannot make lasting Impressions in the field one has chosen. 

“Callification,” is the calling from within. If a person has a calling from within to be in a profession, then the quality of the work, he or she gives the organisation and the impact the person makes easily stand out from the rest. They are normally so self-motivated that they only need to be told the end state, not the how. Team leaders can easily distinguish between those driven by qualification and fired by “callification.” 

Selection Criterion 

Recruitment is now mostly an outsourced activity. Recruiters and head hunters are guided by the selection criteria template provided by the client. They look only at the qualification and track record of the prospective resource because they have no means to determine the callification.  Team leaders at all levels would love to have those fired by “callification” because it makes achieving goals easy. Many “callified” people are considered mavericks and leaders unsure of themselves may be loath to have them around. 

One of the common responses I get to most of my articles is, “What is the remedy?” There is no panacea for HR problems. It must be tailored to suit each situation. I cannot help HR professionals or those involved in making policies on selection, career progression, attrition,
and retention, by prescribing any means to determine if someone has the “callification” that they are looking for. I certainly know of a CEO who goes to great lengths to look for it.  

The CEO 

The qualification required to get on to the organisational roll is just an engineering degree. The degree guarantees the prospective candidate only an opportunity to sit for an examination conducted by the firm.  The exam unlike entrance processes adopted by many other firms focuses mostly on the application of knowledge that the qualification was supposed to have provided the candidate with. It also evaluates the ingenuity and adaptability of the candidate. 

Once a candidate gets through the written gateway, he or she faces an interview. According to the CEO, they look for the “spark” in the candidate. Talking to the CEO, I understand that the candidate reveals the presence or absence of the “spark” they are looking for within the first five minutes of the interview. The candidates call it the “desire to do something special” and I now call it “callification.” The candidate’s lack of communication skills does not become a barrier in this determination process.  It is a vibe, a feel that the candidate sends across and one that can easily be picked up by the discerning. The firm attributes the almost 100% retention of the resources to that spark or callification. The firm has been growing, in size and business. 

With no malice to recruiting agencies and professional head hunters, third-party recruitment may always ensure qualified resources, not “callified” ones.  Organisations staffed by “callified” people can make even deserts bloom.

The Cat School and A Crown I Refuse to Give

It was quarter past 7 in the evening. Anne and I  were seated on the veranda chairs for our daily dose of post-dinner conversation. The day had been very warm. A cold moist breeze gently blew in. “It's raining somewhere,” I said. She didn't reply. She put a finger over her lips and then pointed towards the cat on the road.

We live in a gated community. The colony road, at its broadest outside our house, serves as a tiled pad for turning vehicles. The mother cat was there with her kitten. A child in the colony had brought the mother cat into the colony as a kitten. She was smart and grew up to be a beautiful cat. Ever since, tomcats in the neighbourhood viciously vie with each other for her affections. She litters regularly. 

Seated majestically, she had a rat under one of her paws. Her kitten sat curiously watching the rat struggling to escape. Without warning, she let the rat free. What followed was a hunt in slow motion. The rat ran for its life. The kitten seemed lost. Mama chased the rat, caught it, returned to where she was and settled down. Then without warning she released the rat again. The kitten chased the rat  but failed to catch it. Mama wouldn't let the lesson end in failure! The lesson was repeated a few times. The rat also must have got tired of futile attempts to escape. Finally, the kitten got it right and caught its first feast. “Efficient teacher,” remarked my wife. 

Jungle demands survival skills and matriarchs invest a lot in enabling progenies. What about us ? I wondered. 

There are more than one answer to each question in life. They are present around us. But it reveals itself only if one has the eye to see, ear to hear, head to decipher and heart to relate. I had my chance. This issue had come up for post-dinner discussion a few days before the ‘cat’ incident.

A friend of mine had recently ventured into the field of business. An attempt to start something, especially a business, that demands a lot of physical and mental commitment when one is well past sixty, the decision and follow through, the least to say, is incredible. My friend had retired from the army where he held a very senior position. He had a pension and could spend his days pursuing his passion. I was proud of him. “What prompted you to start this?” I asked. “See Jacob; I couldn't have handed over my designation to my son. But in business, I can anoint my children,” he replied. 

Awash with guilt for a moment,  I realised that I had done nothing like that for my girls. All along when they grew up, they were guaranteed only facilitation for their education. They had to be on their own for everything else. They did exactly that. They chose the field they wanted and toiled hard. One a Masters in Business Administration and CS and the other an IITian, they never disappointed me. They roughed it out in the wide open world and found their space.

Did I fail my children? 

Enabling progenies by creating a conducive environment is a parenting responsibility. Empowering them to achieve their goals is a step ahead. They have the authority to decide for themselves. They have the responsibility and therefore the accountability to themselves for what they have become or haven't. Handing over a crown and anointing them was never on my agenda. Did I abdicate my responsibilities?

There was no reason for me to grudge his reasons but his cause was at great variance with my convictions. Right and wrong is a matter of perception, a considered choice of every individual. He  might be right. 

Was his endeavour a pursuit of passions or driven by compulsions? Passions could be compelling but can compulsions become passions? Maybe!

It is said that survival is the toughest in The Savanna. Life and death are in an undetachable embrace there. Every death in Savanna sustains many others' life and every living thing, flora or fauna, is a potential death threat to another. Each mother in the wild Savanna knows that chances of survival of offspring depend solely on their ability to defeat death at every corner and every moment. We comfort ourselves in the belief that such life is confined only to the wild. We call it ‘Law of the Jungle’!

Think again. We could be wrong. They may be better off than we think.  A close look will reveal that odds stacked against human species are far more than that we currently comprehend. According to one study, the entire human population is cramped into less than 1.5 million square kilometers, a mere 1% of the total habitable land on the planet where as the wild animals have about 40 million square kilometers a whopping 38% as Forest. We normally speak about endangering other species by encroaching into their space, but remain silent and criminally oblivious to the unpardonable death and destruction we cause to our own species in the quest for religious, political or economic dominance. In such an environment, shouldn't we be enabling our offspring far better and more seriously than the mothers in the wild?

Unconsciously, it is the same parenting instinct, as in the wild, but greatly skewed that compels us to create tangible assets to be handed over to our offspring in the belief that they will take it forward and hand it over to their offspring. Unfortunately, inadequately enabled and insufficiently empowered, the recipients soon waste out the assets.

“पूत कपूत तो क्यों धन संचे,; पूत सपूत तो क्यों धन संचे" wasn't said in vain.  

Creating assets in pursuit of one's own passion is great, but driven by compulsions to crown the progeny may not always yield intended results. Each Empire and each Kingdom of the past bears testimony to this profound truth.

Pursuit is a personal choice and compulsion a state of helplessness.

I have no crown to handover.

Additional Input

For those interested

The planet can be divided as follows

Land mass -149 Million Square KMs ( 29%).

Oceans   - 361 Million Square Kms (71%).

Of the total landmass  (149 Million Square KMs)

106 Million Square KMs (71%) is habitable.

 15 Million Square KMs (10%) is Glacier

28 Million Square KMs (19%) is Barren Land

Of all the habitable land in the world (106 Million Square KMs )

48 Million Square KMs (46%) is used for Agriculture.  

40 Million Square KMs (38%) is Forest

<17 Million Square KMs (14%) is Shrubs

>1 Million Square KMs (1%) is settlement and Infrastructure

>1 Million Square KMs (1%) is Freshwater

Recognition, Where Due

 

Centrality of Easter

Christians, world over, celebrate Easter today. The nature of celebrations is primarily dictated by local customs and traditions. The central theme of Easter celebrations inevitably remains the resurrection of Christ, the Son of God,  the sacrificial lamb, and the way to eternal life . One of the pillars on which Christianity rests is resurrection. 

Beyond Christianity

There is an interesting aspect within the Holy Bible that goes beyond Christianity. It is something that we often come across and experience but seldom find courage to emulate. It is about recognising and acknowledging someone’s contributions, often  against great odds, at great personal risk and costs. Let us revisit resurrection in a new perspective to understand the role of two individuals, hardly spoken about. Maybe you could end up finding yourself there. Maybe you could end up identifying someone like that in your organisation.

 

The First Easter

Unlike contemporary Easter, marked by joyous celebrations, the day of actual resurrection according to scriptures, was one steeped in fear, despair, and disbelief. 

The masses who followed Christ for about three years were mostly peasants, poverty stricken,  downtrodden, and the lowest of the lowest in the society. They followed Jesus of Nazareth in the hope that he would overthrow the cruel and oppressive political and religious regime. They believed that He would lead them to better days, which He called the Kingdom of God. 

It was a Friday. The very man who promised them deliverance was sentenced to death by the very regime he promised to topple! He was crucified like any other criminal. He even suffered the ignominy of carrying his own cross all the way up to Calvary in front of the very same people, those He had promised the kingdom of God. He was charged with blasphemy and rebellion against the crown. He was an Anti National.  The majority wanted him dead.  He had become a threat talking against them and their ways. He had to die . He was crucified. 

His followers were let down by His death. Everybody who  went out to listen to him was scared. Those considered close to him went into hiding. The closest disowned him. His resurrection from the dead only added to the confusion.

Two Who Stood Out

Two individuals emerge very special after the crucifixion. The first was Joseph of Arimathea, a rich and eminent personality. He was a minister in the council. He felt what Jesus said was right but kept quiet out of fear of his community, the ruling majority. The Second person was a man called Nicodemus, a renowned teacher also a member of the nobility.  He is known to have met Jesus, secretly at night to understand the meaning of being born again or born anew. The underlying fact is that both belonged to the majority, believed what Jesus said was right but was scared of coming out in the open.

After the crucifixion Joseph approaches Pilate for permission to take the body of ‘Christ who is Dead’ for burial. He was joined by Nicodemus who provided the spices required for the burial. Imagine the danger the two put themselves in, trying to give the dead, an Anti National sentenced to death for allegedly speaking against the Kaiser, the ruler. Both these individuals did not have the courage to openly support Christ or to openly criticise the policies and practices of  the ruling elite. But His death changed all that.

It would have taken immense inner courage and moral strength to publicly proclaim through their deeds to say  “Yes; He was right”. They were putting themselves at the greatest risk and likelihood of reprisals by the administration. Being from the nobility, they certainly knew what the repercussions could be .  

Takeaway For Us

Easter, for Christians, is a celebration of hope over despair and victory of life over death. But Christians and non Christians alike it is an occasion that must draw our attention to the need of finding inner strength to stand up for what is right before someone is crucified even knowing what reprisals could bring about.

For Christians it may be an occasion to  reaffirm their faith in Christ but for everybody else it is an occasion to find Joseph of Arimathea or Nicodemus within, or at least identify and acknowledge the two outside. 

For the church, it is time to honour the two beyond what has been done till now.

Acknowledgment.

I like to humbly place on record that this article and the thought behind it was inspired by the message of Rev Dr Abraham Kuruvila

Harvesting Cognitive Dissonance

 Go Along 

Comical acts online or on TV, invariably comes along with an abundant dose of ‘canned laughter [1]’. We might miss the joke but not the laughter. Sooner than later, we too tend to laugh along; even when we don't quite get the joke. Our compulsion to go along is more pronounced when there are people around!  

WhatsApp group discussions play it out best. Anyone could have initiated it but inevitably, it gravitates to align with the opinion of an individual or a group of individuals. Initially there could be many widely differing views; strong, loud and clear. As discussions progress, differing voices either fall in line, or just fade into silence. Views that differ from the majoritarian are gradually given up, willfully or under pressure. It is not always necessary for the majoritarian opinion to be correct legal or valid, yet everyone goes along! Don't believe it ?

Revisit previous discussions on your mobile; it could provide undeniable proof! You can easily identify the dominant ones, the dormant mutes and the browbeaten. Eventually everyone tends to go along; to be in the group.  

Two seemingly isolated events but connected by a profound human compulsion called cognitive dissonance; the compelling desire to be with the dominant majority! 

 

Do We Always Go Along  

When our thoughts run contrary to the one predominantly held there is a sense of discomfort within us and we are driven to address it. The easiest way is to align oneself with the majority in view. Individuals to start with, homes, society and even Nation States are not exempted from this behavioral aspect. The degree and intensity of the dissonance experienced differs from person to person. More rooted one is to one’s belief, higher is the intensity of discomfort. If the dissonance has existential risk attached, likelihood of ‘going along’ is stronger.  After all North Koreans adore their leader!  

What happens when there is no existential threat? 

 

Conscience versus Pragmatism 

Mob lynching has become a common occurrence in many places. Individually nobody likes to kill or be killed. But seldom do we find anyone from within trying to prevent the mob from lynching the hapless. At least momentarily conscience of each individual in the mob goes dead.  

Many a time, people tend to go along even when they know, what they're going along with, may not be right. The discord within one’s conscience is often drowned in rudimentary survival need of being part of a group; the predominant human trait that helped us survive the wild, create societies and nation states and even wage wars against one another! Deeply imprinted into our genes, as an acquired  trait and perfected in the course of one's life, giving in to the majoritarian view guarantee us our place in the group and provides a sense of protection irrespective of what we hold as right or wrong. After all; it is more important to be alive to fight another day for another cause that may be more important to us: though that day may never come! In the choice between living by one’s conscience and being alive, spine gives way to survival instincts.   

The debate necessarily need not be on survival issues. Yet; it is it easier to be part of a group even though one knows that the group’s view or decision is wrong. It is our innate quality that draws us closer to the group even against the call of our conscience, justifying the unjustifiable. Those who stand firm by their conscience are either expelled from the group or forced to get out. They either perish in solitude or emerge separately creating groups that hold another set of views seemingly driven by their conscience. This is the path seldom trodden.  

Understanding Majority

Majority may not necessarily be defined in numerical sense always. One strong man can create a majority being the nucleus. Others, join for selfish reasons and the bulk, is made up of people often referred to as silent majority. They are there for fear of being seen holding contrary views. They easily shift to another power center when the wind blows that way. 

Driven by incompetence to voice, impotence to stand up and be heard, they are easily afflicted by cognitive dissonance. Organisations, associations and such bodies are infested with such people; certainly selfish and often scheming.   

Can Cognitive dissonance be productively channeled? 

 

The Mantra for Corporates

Getting teams to deliver and meet deadlines is one aspect that every organization wants. While diversity in skills, domain expertise and opinions add to the quality of options generated, success depends on convergence of thoughts post decision on the way forward and unity in action thereafter. Cognitive dissonance can be ‘managed’ effectively without impinging on individual’s esteem and eroding his skill set and willingness to deploy it. If such a conducive climate is created it can help the organisation reap rich.  

---

[1] Canned laughter or laugh track is the pre-recorded laughter inserted into a audio or video programme. It is essentially a cue for those watching or listening to laugh.