Showing posts with label information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label information. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
The Art of Outsourcing
THE ART OF OUTSOURCING
By
VIKRAM KARVE
Short Fiction - One of my favourite fiction short stories...
One leisurely morning, while I am loafing on
“Hi!” I say.
“Hi,” he says, “where to?”
“Aimless loitering,” I say, “And you?”
“I’m going to work.”
“Work? This early? I thought your shift starts in the evening, or late at night. You work at a call center don’t you?”
“Not now. I quit. I’m on my own now.”
“On your own? What do you do?”
“LPO.”
“LPO? What’s that?”
“Life Process Outsourcing.”
“Life Process Outsourcing? Never heard of it!”
“You’ve heard of Business Process Outsourcing haven’t you?”
“BPO? Outsourcing non-core business activities and functions?”
“Precisely. LPO is similar to BPO. There it’s Business Processes that are outsourced, here it’s Life Processes.”
“Life Processes? Outsourced?”
“Why don’t you come along with me? I’ll show you.”
Soon we are in his office. It looks like a mini call center.
A young attractive girl welcomes us. “Meet Rita, my Manager,” my friend says, and introduces us.
Rita looks distraught, and says to my friend, “I’m not feeling well. Must be viral fever.”
“No problem. My friend here will stand in.”
“What? I don’t have a clue about all this LPO thing!” I protest.
“There’s nothing like learning on the job! Rita will show you.”
“It’s simple,” Rita says, in a hurry. “See the console. You just press the appropriate switch and route the call to the appropriate person or agency.”
And with these words Rita disappears. It’s the shortest induction training I have ever had in my life.
And so I plunge into the world of Life Process Outsourcing; or LPO as they call it.
It’s all very simple.
Everyone is busy. Working people don’t seem to have time these days, but they have lots of money; especially those double income couples, IT nerds, MBA hot shots, finance wizards; just about everybody running desperately in the modern rat race.
So what do they do? Simple. They 'outsource'!
‘Non-core Life Activities’, for which you neither have the inclination or the time – you just outsource them; so you can maximize your work-time to rake in the money and make a fast climb up the ladder of success.
A ring, a flash on the console infront of me and I take my first LPO call.
“My daughter’s puked in her school. They want someone to pick her up and take her home. I’m busy in a shoot and just can’t leave,” a creative ad agency type with a husky voice says.
“Why don’t you tell your husband?” I suggest.
“Are you crazy or something? I’m a single mother.”
“Sorry ma’am. I didn’t know. My sympathies and condolences.”
“Condolences? Who’s this? Is this LPO?”
“Yes ma’am,” I say, press the button marked ‘children’ and transfer the call, hoping I have made the right choice. Maybe I should have pressed ‘doctor’.
Nothing happens for the next few moments. I breathe a sigh of relief.
A yuppie wants his grandmother to be taken to a movie. I press the ‘movies’ button. ‘Movies’ transfers the call back, “Hey, this is for movie tickets; try ‘escort services’. He wants the old hag escorted to the movies.”
‘Escort Services’ are in high demand. These guys and girls, slogging in their offices minting money, want escort services for their kith and kin for various non-core family processes like shopping, movies, eating out, sight seeing, marriages, funerals, all types of functions; even going to art galleries, book fairs, exhibitions, zoos, museums or even a walk in the nearby garden.
A father wants someone to read bedtime stories to his small son while he works late. A busy couple wants proxy stand-in ‘parents’ at the school PTA meeting. An investment banker rings up from
Someone wants his kids to be taken for a swim, brunch, a play and browsing books and music.
A sweet-voiced IT project manager wants someone to motivate and pep-talk her husband, who’s been recently sacked, and is cribbing away at home demoralized. He desperately needs someone to talk to, unburden himself, but the wife is busy – she neither has the time nor the inclination to take a few days off to boost the morale of her depressed husband when there are deadlines to be met at work and so much is at stake.
The things they want outsourced range from the mundane to the bizarre; life processes that one earlier enjoyed and took pride in doing or did as one’s sacred duty are considered ‘non-core life activities’ now-a-days by these highfalutin people.
At the end of the day I feel illuminated on this novel concept of Life Process Outsourcing, and I am about to leave, when suddenly a call comes in.
“LPO?” a man asks softly.
“Yes, this is LPO. May I help you?” I say.
“I’m speaking from
“Please go ahead and feel free to ask anything you desire, Sir. We do everything.”
“Everything?”
“Yes, Sir. Anything and everything!” I say.
“I don’t know how to say this. This is the first time I’m asking. You see, I am working 24/7 on an important project for the last few months. I’m globetrotting abroad and can’t make it there. Can you please arrange for someone suitable to take my wife out to the New Year’s Eve Dance?”
I am taken aback but quickly recover, “Yes, Sir.”
“Please send someone really good, an excellent dancer, and make sure she enjoys and has a good time. She loves dancing and I just haven’t had the time.”
“Of course, Sir.”
“And I told you – I’ve been away abroad for quite some time now and I’ve got to stay out here till I complete the project.”
“I know. Work takes top priority.”
“My wife. She’s been lonely. She desperately needs some love. Do you have someone with a loving and caring nature who can give her some love? I just don’t have the time. You understand what I’m saying, don’t you?”
I let the words sink in. This is one call I am not going to transfer. “Please give me the details, Sir,” I say softly into the mike.
As I walk towards my destination with a spring in my step, I feel truly enlightened.
Till this moment, I never knew that ‘love’ was a 'non-core' 'life-process' worthy of outsourcing.
Long Live LPO!
Life Process Outsourcing!
Love Process Outsourcing!
Call it what you like, but I'm sure you've got the essence of outsourcing.
VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 2009
Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
http://books.sulekha.com/book/appetite-for-a-stroll/default.htm
Saturday, January 24, 2009
IF YOU CANNOT DO IT OUTSOURCE IT
A spoof on outsourcing - just click the link below and read on my fiction blog:
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com/blog/post/2009/01/outsourcing.htm
Vikram Karve
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com/blog/post/2009/01/outsourcing.htm
Vikram Karve
INVISIBLE GATES OF PUNE
THE INVISIBLE GATES OF PUNE
By
VIKRAM KARVE
Every city has its “Gates” – especially historical cities with Forts and Heritage structures. While some actual physical gates are visible, a few are not. Here are a few “Gates” of Pune that are not visible and exist in parlance only. If you find the actual physical “Gate” do let us know.
Peru Gate [maybe derives its name from the guava orchards that may have existed in the vicinity or is it a corrupted Indianized pronunciation of the name Perron, a British Officer after whom the gate was named as I read somewhere?]. Located in the heart of the city surrounded by the best authentic food joints and near Bharat Natya Mandir and Tilak Smarak Mandir.
Pool Gate or Pul Gate [Is there a Bridge or Pool nearby?]. In Pune camp.
Swar Gate [is it named after swari - where one begins one’s travel?]. At the junction of Satara Road and Solapur Road, housing the main State Transport and PMT Bus Terminus.
Quarter Gate [Was the Quarter Guard of a military unit housed here? I will not even risk mentioning the other more popular meaning of the word “quarter” in local lingo!]
Mhasoba Gate [Named after a temple of the same name in the vicinity].
Mariaaee Gate [Is it the Marathi version of Mother Mary (aaee – mother, Maria – Mary) and named after the church nearby?]
Ramoshi Gate. I’m totally clueless and I just can’t figure out!
Body Gate – This one is near Aundh, on the way to Mumbai past Bremen Chowk, and has cute heritage buildings which house police offices. Probably Body Gate housed a body of cavalry outside the Aundh Military Camp across the Mula river.
Dear Reader: Do you know of any more such invisible “Gates” in Pune?
And if you have more information on the gates mentioned above, do comment and let us know.
VIKRAM KARVE
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
vikramkarve@sify.com
vikramkarve@hotmail.com
By
VIKRAM KARVE
Every city has its “Gates” – especially historical cities with Forts and Heritage structures. While some actual physical gates are visible, a few are not. Here are a few “Gates” of Pune that are not visible and exist in parlance only. If you find the actual physical “Gate” do let us know.
Peru Gate [maybe derives its name from the guava orchards that may have existed in the vicinity or is it a corrupted Indianized pronunciation of the name Perron, a British Officer after whom the gate was named as I read somewhere?]. Located in the heart of the city surrounded by the best authentic food joints and near Bharat Natya Mandir and Tilak Smarak Mandir.
Pool Gate or Pul Gate [Is there a Bridge or Pool nearby?]. In Pune camp.
Swar Gate [is it named after swari - where one begins one’s travel?]. At the junction of Satara Road and Solapur Road, housing the main State Transport and PMT Bus Terminus.
Quarter Gate [Was the Quarter Guard of a military unit housed here? I will not even risk mentioning the other more popular meaning of the word “quarter” in local lingo!]
Mhasoba Gate [Named after a temple of the same name in the vicinity].
Mariaaee Gate [Is it the Marathi version of Mother Mary (aaee – mother, Maria – Mary) and named after the church nearby?]
Ramoshi Gate. I’m totally clueless and I just can’t figure out!
Body Gate – This one is near Aundh, on the way to Mumbai past Bremen Chowk, and has cute heritage buildings which house police offices. Probably Body Gate housed a body of cavalry outside the Aundh Military Camp across the Mula river.
Dear Reader: Do you know of any more such invisible “Gates” in Pune?
And if you have more information on the gates mentioned above, do comment and let us know.
VIKRAM KARVE
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
vikramkarve@sify.com
vikramkarve@hotmail.com
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Decision Management
The SHOR Paradigm
[Decision-making in Uncertainty]
By
VIKRAM KARVE
“The man who insists upon seeing with perfect clearness before he decides, never decides” …Frederic Amiel
Decision-making is so pervasive that everyone, professionally or personally, is involved with making a variety of decisions.
In today’s fast-moving world, the timing of a decision is of paramount importance in many decision-making situations. In real life even the “perfect” decision may not be optimal if it is made too late.
Information is a vital resource in decision-making. One of the most important characteristics of successful managers is the ability to make the correct decision when confronted with imperfect or insufficient information (i.e.) Decision-making under conditions of uncertainty.
In the context of decision-processing, two realms or domains of uncertainty are:
1. Information Input Uncertainty which creates the need for hypothesis generation and evaluation;
2. Consequence-of-Action Uncertainty which creates the need for option generation and evaluation.
THE SHOR PARADIGM
A decision taxonomy: The Stimulus – Hypothesis – Options – Response (SHOR) paradigm, formulated by Wohl, is useful in such decision situations. The SHOR paradigm represents a qualitative, descriptive, model as distinct from a quantitative, predictive model, and comprises three primary decision-making task elements:
S: Stimulus Input Data Processing
H: Hypothesis Generation, Hypothesis Evaluation, Information Processing [What is?]
O: Option Generation, Option Evaluation, Decision-Making [What if?]
R: Response Output Action
The SHOR paradigm is basically an extension of the classical Stimulus – Response (SR) Paradigm of behaviourist psychology. The SHOR paradigm provides explicitly for the necessity to deal with information input uncertainty and consequence-of-action uncertainty, and helps us understand some of the peculiar human factors that affect the quality of the decision-making and answering questions such as:
What makes some decision-makers perform better than others, especially in placing high-value assets at risk, in business?
What are the sources and dimensions of “poor” performance?
HUMAN ERRORS IN DECISION-MAKING
Based on the SHOR Model, human errors in decision-making appear to lie in four domains:
(S) Stimulus: “I didn’t know…”
(H) Hypothesis: “I didn’t understand…”
(O) Options: “I didn’t consider…”
(R) Response: “I didn’t act…”
Stimulus based errors of the type “I didn’t know…” result from lack or inadequacy of information, the true inability to obtain information.
“I didn’t understand…” is the fundamental result of information input uncertainty, while “I didn’t consider…” is the product of consequence-of-action uncertainty.
It is possible to have accessed all significant information, to have developed the correct hypothesis and to have selected the best option and yet fail to take appropriate action. The two possible reasons for the “I didn’t act…” type of response error are:
1. Paralysis: This is a complete failure to act, the pathological ‘observation of an inevitable course’ without intervention. It is caused by an over-riding emotional struggle in which some internal factor is being placed in conflict with the course of action selected by the decision-maker. The final scene in the evergreen classic film The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) exemplifies such a situation.
2. Misjudgement: The decision-maker correctly decides what to do but errs in either or both of the two dimensions – how [the specifics of the action] or when [the timing of the action].
Prediction of the critical consequences of inaction may be of some help in dealing with paralysis whilst the ability to perform sensitivity analyses may assist in alleviating misjudgement.
Any Decision-Maker [and designers of decision aids] must address the four cardinal types of errors epitomized by the SHOR paradigm: “I didn’t know…”, “I didn’t understand…”, “I didn’t consider…” and “I didn’t act…”
DECISION-MAKING IN UNCERTAINTY
In the context of decision-making in uncertainty, the conflict theory paradigm developed by Janis and Mann may be apt. This paradigm postulates five patterns of coping behaviour which tends to occur in such situations:
1. Unconflicted Adherence in which the uncertain, or risk, information is ignored and the decision-maker complacently decides to continue whatever he has been doing.
2. Unconflicted Change to a new course of action, where the decision-maker uncritically adopts whichever new course of action is most salient, obvious or strongly recommended.
3. Defensive Avoidance in which the decision-maker evades conflict by procrastinating, shifting responsibility to someone else, or constructing wishful rationalisations and remaining selectively inattentive to corrective information.
4. Hypervigilance wherein the decision-maker searches frantically for a way out of the dilemma and impulsively seizes upon a hastily contrived solution that seems to promise immediate relief, overlooking the full range of consequences of his choice because of emotional excitement, repetitive thinking and cognitive constriction. In its most extreme form hypervigilance is referred to as “panic”.
5. Concerned Vigilance in which the decision-maker optimally processes pertinent information, generates and evaluates hypotheses and options before selecting a response as characterised by the SHOR paradigm.
In many real-life situations a decision-maker cannot always keep waiting until the entire information-input and consequence-of-action conditions are known a priori with certainty. In most cases there is no such thing as “perfect” certainty.
If a single most important characteristic is crucial to a decision-maker in any field, it is the ability to make optimal decisions in conditions of uncertainty. Qualitative descriptive models like the SHOR paradigm may prove useful in such situations.
To quote Frederic Amiel once again: “The man who insists upon seeing with perfect clearness before he decides, never decides”.
VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 2008
Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.
vikramkarve@sify.com
vikramkarve@hotmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
http://www.ryze.com/go/karve
[Decision-making in Uncertainty]
By
VIKRAM KARVE
“The man who insists upon seeing with perfect clearness before he decides, never decides” …Frederic Amiel
Decision-making is so pervasive that everyone, professionally or personally, is involved with making a variety of decisions.
In today’s fast-moving world, the timing of a decision is of paramount importance in many decision-making situations. In real life even the “perfect” decision may not be optimal if it is made too late.
Information is a vital resource in decision-making. One of the most important characteristics of successful managers is the ability to make the correct decision when confronted with imperfect or insufficient information (i.e.) Decision-making under conditions of uncertainty.
In the context of decision-processing, two realms or domains of uncertainty are:
1. Information Input Uncertainty which creates the need for hypothesis generation and evaluation;
2. Consequence-of-Action Uncertainty which creates the need for option generation and evaluation.
THE SHOR PARADIGM
A decision taxonomy: The Stimulus – Hypothesis – Options – Response (SHOR) paradigm, formulated by Wohl, is useful in such decision situations. The SHOR paradigm represents a qualitative, descriptive, model as distinct from a quantitative, predictive model, and comprises three primary decision-making task elements:
S: Stimulus Input Data Processing
H: Hypothesis Generation, Hypothesis Evaluation, Information Processing [What is?]
O: Option Generation, Option Evaluation, Decision-Making [What if?]
R: Response Output Action
The SHOR paradigm is basically an extension of the classical Stimulus – Response (SR) Paradigm of behaviourist psychology. The SHOR paradigm provides explicitly for the necessity to deal with information input uncertainty and consequence-of-action uncertainty, and helps us understand some of the peculiar human factors that affect the quality of the decision-making and answering questions such as:
What makes some decision-makers perform better than others, especially in placing high-value assets at risk, in business?
What are the sources and dimensions of “poor” performance?
HUMAN ERRORS IN DECISION-MAKING
Based on the SHOR Model, human errors in decision-making appear to lie in four domains:
(S) Stimulus: “I didn’t know…”
(H) Hypothesis: “I didn’t understand…”
(O) Options: “I didn’t consider…”
(R) Response: “I didn’t act…”
Stimulus based errors of the type “I didn’t know…” result from lack or inadequacy of information, the true inability to obtain information.
“I didn’t understand…” is the fundamental result of information input uncertainty, while “I didn’t consider…” is the product of consequence-of-action uncertainty.
It is possible to have accessed all significant information, to have developed the correct hypothesis and to have selected the best option and yet fail to take appropriate action. The two possible reasons for the “I didn’t act…” type of response error are:
1. Paralysis: This is a complete failure to act, the pathological ‘observation of an inevitable course’ without intervention. It is caused by an over-riding emotional struggle in which some internal factor is being placed in conflict with the course of action selected by the decision-maker. The final scene in the evergreen classic film The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) exemplifies such a situation.
2. Misjudgement: The decision-maker correctly decides what to do but errs in either or both of the two dimensions – how [the specifics of the action] or when [the timing of the action].
Prediction of the critical consequences of inaction may be of some help in dealing with paralysis whilst the ability to perform sensitivity analyses may assist in alleviating misjudgement.
Any Decision-Maker [and designers of decision aids] must address the four cardinal types of errors epitomized by the SHOR paradigm: “I didn’t know…”, “I didn’t understand…”, “I didn’t consider…” and “I didn’t act…”
DECISION-MAKING IN UNCERTAINTY
In the context of decision-making in uncertainty, the conflict theory paradigm developed by Janis and Mann may be apt. This paradigm postulates five patterns of coping behaviour which tends to occur in such situations:
1. Unconflicted Adherence in which the uncertain, or risk, information is ignored and the decision-maker complacently decides to continue whatever he has been doing.
2. Unconflicted Change to a new course of action, where the decision-maker uncritically adopts whichever new course of action is most salient, obvious or strongly recommended.
3. Defensive Avoidance in which the decision-maker evades conflict by procrastinating, shifting responsibility to someone else, or constructing wishful rationalisations and remaining selectively inattentive to corrective information.
4. Hypervigilance wherein the decision-maker searches frantically for a way out of the dilemma and impulsively seizes upon a hastily contrived solution that seems to promise immediate relief, overlooking the full range of consequences of his choice because of emotional excitement, repetitive thinking and cognitive constriction. In its most extreme form hypervigilance is referred to as “panic”.
5. Concerned Vigilance in which the decision-maker optimally processes pertinent information, generates and evaluates hypotheses and options before selecting a response as characterised by the SHOR paradigm.
In many real-life situations a decision-maker cannot always keep waiting until the entire information-input and consequence-of-action conditions are known a priori with certainty. In most cases there is no such thing as “perfect” certainty.
If a single most important characteristic is crucial to a decision-maker in any field, it is the ability to make optimal decisions in conditions of uncertainty. Qualitative descriptive models like the SHOR paradigm may prove useful in such situations.
To quote Frederic Amiel once again: “The man who insists upon seeing with perfect clearness before he decides, never decides”.
VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 2008
Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.
vikramkarve@sify.com
vikramkarve@hotmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com
http://www.ryze.com/go/karve
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)