Hockey … India

The Indian hickey team lost every single match at the Olympics … Including to South Korea, Belgium, and South Africa. That India lost to Netherlands, Germany, and New Zealand sort of seemed to be an assumption. This is the point when it seems to be very tempting to write the epitaph of Indian hockey. But lets look at an analysis of the point at which Indian hockey is.

Hockey in India has been at the receiving end of apathy for decades now, at least two, would you say? And yet, every two years, once during the Asian games, and once during the Commonwealth games, or the Olympics we that Indian hockey is going downhill, harking back to the glory days of Indian hockey, when we saw (here i am talking about my generation) players like Pargat Singh, M. P. Singh, Mohammed Shahid, Zafar Iqbal, Jude Felix, Merwyn Fernandes, or Salim Sherwani, Hassan Sardar, Samiullah, Karimullah play hockey for the subcontinental giants, or the fact that India has won 10 medals in hockey, out of which 8 have been gold medals. One thing we need to understand, and expect, is that it will take at least 4-5 years for Indian hockey to reach somewhere close to the glory days. This is a long term strategy, and while we should certainly try for a podium finish at Rio, we shouldnt expect it, i feel.

Having said that, lets look at the other side. Today, India is at a point where we can either choose to be the dominant team among the minnows, or be the minnow in the big league, and we have reached from the former to the latter. This, i feel, has come with comparative ease, and the credit should go to the players, coach, and administrators, though frankly, my knowledge of hockey comes from what i watch, or what i read. Having said that, what is surprising is that even though we lost, the quality of hockey played by the team is far inferior to what they played at the Olympic qualifiers, or at the Azlan Shah cup recently. While losing to Netherlands and Germany was expected, the team played a good game versus the Dutch, and if we see how the Dutch demolished Great Britain in the semi-final, India certainly played very well. I suppose the team started losing their way from the match versus Germany, and from there, it was downhill. Maybe its, like former skipper Dhanraj Pillay says, something outside the field which was bothering the team members.

Whatever way it be, we need to look at the picture in its entirety, and see how Indian hockey can, given encouragement, reach the levels of past glory.

Leaders …

The question of leadership, and who leaders are, or ought to be, has been around for a while. I remember the discusion going on about whether are born or whether they can be made for two decades, and i suppose we werent the first people in the world to discuss this. This is a question i keep getting asked When i am running a leadership development training program. Of course, this is a question to which everyone has an answer, and everyone would be confident theirnanswer is the right one.

Well, i too have an answer, though i am not sure if this is the right one. I feel leaders are born, but having said that, there are some principles of leadership which can be generalized (this in the face of believing that every leader has their own distinctive style, not all of which can be generalized, because its relevant to the context) and so, can be taught to some extent.

Having said that, men look up to leaders. Which means that if we can identify the people who people look up to, then we have identified natural leaders who have emerged. This is something this piece from managementexchange talks about.

What you will find really cool about the piece is that it describes that natural leaders emerge based on the level to which they are ready to share expertise or knowledge they have, and the level to whch they are able or willing to collaborate with each other. This, i feel, is the learning paradigm of knowledge-work in a flat world, as they say, that “knowledge shared is knowledge squared”, now it also seems that this paradigm of squaring knowledge may also be at the core of emergent leadership.

Thoughts About Innovation …

Read a nice blog about innovation here. Thought would write some thoughts that came, reading this:

1. Innovation != Invention. Innovation is not the same as inventing something new. It could be about finding new ways of doing the same thing, or using the same way to do different things. How many of you have opened a beer bottle with a spoon? Would you think thats an innovation?

2. Innovation != R&D. Seems to be a corollary of the innovation != invention idea.

3. Innovation != Glamour. Not necessary that innovation create something new, something glamorous. Often times, its also about doing day-to-day things much more effectively, or efficiently. There was a picture a friend had shared on facebook of a guy connecting the drain of the AC with the input of the cooler … water out, water in. Not glamorous, but would you say this is innovation?

In a nutshell, innovation, i feel, is a simpler, more effective, more efficient way of solving a problem. And this way need not necessarily come from a particular team or part of the business. Thats why, crowdsource … innovation is about first identifying a problem (and problems or customer requirements arent always easy to identify), and then to find a solution which is feasible, and which works. I feel both of these make up the idea of innovation. What do you think?

Changing Face of College Education …

I had written earlier about how technology is changing the face of education. Besides, theres plenty written on the topic, so theres not much point is me writing more. Having said that, though, not much has been written about what could be the new face of education. I came across a blog which i thought was a bit different, in that it spelt out the changes which we could see. There are three things which the blog says:

1. Most initial level teaching at university level will be done through online presentations.

2. Learning and assessment will be more social.

3. Teaching will happen in very different ways.

I believe the teaching of classes is something which universities could look at changing quickly. Instead of professors teaching the same courses year after year to different students, the teaching could be more technology-enabled. This means that:

1. Theoretical aspects of courses could be video recorded, with the professors providing the content, and presenters presenting that content to students. This way, professors get much more time to do things other than teaching the same content again and again.

2. Professors could use this time to better engage their students through coursework. What this would mean is that instead of teaching classes, professors could develop assignments, design comprehensive project work, moderate discussions, answer student questions, run quizzes, referee peer assessment, all this without taking any extra time to their working day. All of these could be done in a social form.

In other words, students would collaborate to learn, and professors would:

1. Provide theoretical inputs through online classes.

2. Create learning environment.

3. Facilitate the learning process.

This means not just that the profile of the teacher could change, but this also means that the way students study, learn, and are evaluated, could change. And the learning structure would change, from being teacher-centric, to being student-centric.

IIT …

Some thoughts about IIT …

There are some problems with the IIT-JEE … One big one that i am seeing in the discussions is how IIT is amenable to mugging up. This has led to the coaching industry. Probably Mr. Anand Kumar from Super 30 put it very well … If students are able to mug up and clear JEE, then theres something wrong with the way the JEE is structured. Agree with Mr. Kumar. I feel the heyday of the JEE was during the 80s and the 90s (no, this has no connection with me going to college in the 80s). Peparing for JEE was uphill, and there was no way one could look at last few years papers and try to figure out what kind of questions would come in JEE this year. In other words, there wasnt much of a pattern to the JEE.

And this, probably, is the main aspect of the reform required in JEE. One of the reasons the IIT’s have done well is because they have ensured that they selected the best students in the country. This was laid to rest by the coaching industry. Though, i feel, it would be folly to blame the industry. If the JEE had a different format, the industry would have prepared students for that format. There is a coaching industry around CAT, too, after all.

Theres probably a different way to solve the problem … That may be to change the format of the exam. I remember, questions used to of the type that if you dont have your concepts clear, you might probably end up spending half an hour to solve a problem, but if you were clear, it would probably take ten minutes. Probably a better idea would be to bring in a format which challenges students to think, which tests their concepts.

Scenario … The objective is to determine the pressure on the wall of a check dam of a particular depth … Given the information about the dam, students might need to calculate the pressure distribution on the wall. Or, the motion of a spring is defined by a differential equation, and the student may need to find the displacement of a particular point on the spring at a particular point of time. (you will see that i havent come up with a scenario for chemistry, but thats only because in the last few words i have described e limits of my knowledge of the subject).

Idea is, make the exam so that there are no set patterns … Yes, do have a format for the exam, but not patterns for the questions. Ths may be the way to take JEE to the next level.

Thoughts From The Match …

Writing some thoughts i had at the India-Britain match today. India lost 3-2, but often, the scoreline doesnt tell the entire story. Which is why i felt the need to write these thughts … Also to write what i feel is the direction the team seems to be taking.

To begin with, we need to be clear of one thing … We should not evaluate the performance of the team on a match-by-match basis. The kind of improvement we are talking about is a long-drawn process. Over the last few years, India have been underdogs in most of the tournaments we have played. Though there have been flashes of brilliance, like winning the Asia Cup, these have been, at best, flashes. What we need is sustained performance, for which, is required sustained improvement.

Coming back to the game … India were playing the tournament favourites. If the Indian team were underdogs, playing the favourites, the match would have been one-sided. That the match wasnt.

Passing in the Indian team seemed to be non-existent. The defence was terrible, and man-to-man marking in the D was non-existent. Maybe tgere were too many solo runs. The British had 56% possession of the ball, and yet, the score was 3-2.

What this means is this … I felt the Indian team was playing suboptimally tonight, and yet, played a game, against the tournament favourites, which was quite balanced. What this means is that if thenIndian team play to their potential, the team can win against any side. What the team probably needs time … And opportunity. One factor, i feel, is that Michael Nobbs needs to be given time to develop to their potential. With his coachng, they can.

What hockey needs in the subcontinent is encouragement, for both India and Pakistan to reach again the glory we once had. Jut a thought … Why cant India and Pakistan host a hockey tournament, an annual fixture, to match the Champions Trophy? This would build enthusiasm for the game.

As for the Indian team … Go for it, Mr. Nobbs. And for the team … Guys, go for gold. There are lots of folks in the country who are looking forward to an Olympic medal in hockey.

Stories …

As i am writing this, i am watching an animated movie … Alice in Wonderland, with my son. Not qute sure who between the two of us is enjoying it more though. And this got me thinking. When we were children, folks at home were distressed about the prevalence of comics which were distracting us from reading books, just as now we fret over how TV has taken over the lives of children and is distracting them from some good reading.

Well, fact is, earlier, folks had books, and they read them. Then books got distilled into comics, and we, as children, read them (though not only as children … Quite a few of us read them even now), and learnt quite a bit from them. I remember some really happy times reading Amar Chitra Katha, which introduced us children to the rich beauty of mythology and of history. And today, i feel, movies, especially animated ones, are quite an effective introduction to history, mythology, and heritage. After all, animation adds to the rich beauty of the stories, and makes the stories enjoyable to an audience of children. Till then, a very happy unbirthday to you …