A mockery of all the other professions where 'desirability as a female' is not the major criteria…
Disclaimer: I have taken around 400 flights in the past few years. Having witnessed the sheer HARD-work first hand, I have deep respect for the Air-Hostesses. This post is NOT ABOUT the air-hostess profession per se, but about a stupid ad by an air-hostess-training-institute.
Secondly: Whether you like it or not, “desirability as a female” is the SINGLE most important criterion into the selection process and I have no moral issue it.
The Ad: shows an impudent young girl who talks about her 'starting salary' as "Seventy bloody thousand!!! Who needs an NRI?" Her tone and demeanor and everything else will bring the word "F***ing" (instead of bloody) to mind in later recalls. The totality makes it clear that her entire capital is her gender, looks and age and she looks at life through roses and greeting card wisdom!
What I did not like about it:
1. Rs.70,000/- per month is a great value in the Indian salary context. If you don't agree, just think how many who retired by 2005 would have dreamt of crossing that figure even towards the end of 30-35 years' professional life? Is this girl doing more value-addition? It is a kind of insult to all those who were in much more socially productive professions, but never made this kind of money.
2. Forget retired people. Just recollect/imagine how much effort and grit YOU required (or will require) to cross this figure. Realize that that effort/grit can be trumped merely by the right "desirability as a female". I felt insulted. Don't YOU?
3. What about the millions of other girls who will not make this kind of money (nurses, doctors, teachers, lawyers, clerks, accountants, etc.) because they are in jobs where they choose NOT to capitalize on their "desirability as a female". Is "finding an NRI" the ultimate salvation of a girl's life? I would like to know the opinion of some female readers on this one.
4. This ad shows money as the singular output of a job. If we are talking purely of money, then Rs.70,000/- per month is waaay toooo cheap. The movie ‘Corporate’ showed that there are girls in that demography who make that kind of money in 24 hours, OK?. Doesn’t this ad promote the “money is the ultimate goal” culture? Yes, I see some boys too nowadays, but the numbers are miniscule. And yes, the ‘desirability’ criterion remains applicable with boys too.
So, I thought the ad insulting to both sides:
Those who join are being told, “Look – the hard-work etc is all ok. At the rock bottom, you are just a piece of *** otherwise you wouldn’t be here.”.
Those who choose join other professions are being told: “Look, you may slog for the rest of your life. That cutie next door will gift a Toyota Camry to her dad/boyfriend you can’t even dream of!”
Again, these are ‘facts-of-life’. Facts are facts, they cannot be right or wrong. The issue is not with the facts, but with the values projected by the ad. The attitude projected by the impudent girl in the ad is entirely unfit for an air-hostess. (At least an air-hostess-training-institute should know this.) This “Seventy bloody thousand” line has the potential to ‘get into the head’ of quite a few girls of that age. I can imagine the plight of many parents who will be forced to cough-up the astronomical fees against their judgment or lose face with their daughters purely on monetary grounds. I do hope the ad is withdrawn soon because it projects the wrong values.
Ohh! hullo, come back!!! Where is service management angle in this?
Service Management Issue: The service catalog lists services which are ‘stated’. However, in service management, for good customer satisfaction, ‘implied’ services are as important as ‘stated’ services. In a service management situation, if you fail to grasp the implied services correctly, you are headed for failure, regardless of your competence on the ‘stated’ services.
Now, please don’t read any innuendo in ‘implied’ services. Some of them are:
1. Making customers ‘feel’ pleasant and happy from welcome to exit.
2. Being very difficult to “shout at”. (it is difficult to yell at a 20 yr old girl!)
3. Invoking ‘gallantry in customers’ to cover shortcomings in service. People say ‘koi baat nahi!’ more readily.
Though an average middle-aged man would fall miserably short in these ‘implied’ services, there is nothing morally wrong with these services. Facts-of-life!
Cheers!
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Friday, June 4, 2010
Ketchup sachets are free WITH THE PIZZA, OK?
Apart from consulting, I also am a trainer for almost the entire pyramid of ITIL / ITSM courses. Right from ITIL V3 Foundation, to the Intermediate levels of RCV, OSA, PPO and SOA on one side and the SS, SD, ST, SO and CSI on the other. I am also accredited to deliver one of the most obtuse courses ever, the MALC! Naturally, travelling to new places and meeting new people is one of the chief attractions of the job. Every time I face a new batch, I meet many new people. Since, these courses are in the Management Training domain, I never cut short on the introduction round as it gives me good insights into the personalities. Over the few days of training, the participants share very intimate aspects of their professional life and I am required to share the ITIL wisdom on that particular aspect. (occassionally, I have to restrain them from going into their personal lives...) Being able to help highly competent technical people to transcend their technical boundaries and venture into the management domain is a great source of personal fulfillment and satisfaction.
Every time a training program is closing, there is a feedback session, where often people voice their opinions. Many communicate with me over email after the batch is over, and over the past few years, I have collected quite a few geniune friends; these relationships have endured over the years, where we keep in touch and report our 'current states', 'whereabouts', career choices, etc.
So, when I got a chat-request from one Varma from Agra, in India, I took it routinely as a participant who wants to stay in touch, nothing more. Over some time we exchanged polite "GoodMornings" and "How are yous".
Now, I don't like to set up the BUSY red-dot on the GoogleTalk - it is kindof standoffish. So, my status is always green. I would rather run the risk of people pinging me at inopportune moments rather than appear uncommunicative. [Ofcourse, this is my blog so it is all about ME. I am not accusing anyone else of being standoffish, so don't get peeved if you happen to set up red-dots all the time. That is your choice and I fully love and respect people who put up busy signs...]
From the last few days, this Varma asked politely whether I would answer queries. I said yes. Then he asked a question. I answered. Then he started arguing about that. Then I told him that I wouldn't be able to engage in a debate with him on chat. If he had simple queries of the "which course should I do before which" types, I could reply quickly. Then I educated him on the difference between closed questions (name two components of priority) and open questions (tell me something about priority model), and indicated that the chat medium is suitable only for closed questions. Then I told him, that delivering trainings is my PROFESSION, so if he needs elaborate answers, he has to get into one of my training programs. Now if you have read so far, your patience must have run out, and so had mine. So, I explained to him that he could ask questions on LinkedIn if he liked, and I would reply publically when I could. The next day, I got a friend request from him on linked in and then I got a question in the LinkedIn inbox which I reproduce here verbatim: "Please advice how Service Operation (SO) maintains a balance between an internal IT view and an external business view. Pleas elaborate!" Phew! So, now the LinkedIn inbox becomes the chat mechanism..!
When I had said LinkedIn, I expected him to start a discussion into which I too could have contributed. This is an invitation to write books without any royalty! So, ultimately I had to do the ultimate... I felt sad, but I have only so many hours in a day (24 last time I counted) and simply cannot devote the time to such open-ended questions.
However, I had to clarify the situation in Service Management terms, otherwise I would not be able to sleep properly. So, bingo! I realized ***Service Catlog SubVersion*** How? Well, as a trainer, I deliver certian paid services. Out of which, there are courses like V2M, V3F, ST, SO, RCV, PPO, MALC, etc. To access these services, participants have to pay the requsite fees. They land into a classroom, and there depending upon relevance and participation of other class members, their queries are answered. The other (friendly) services I provide (yeah, friendly, no extra charge!) are minor queries over email, chat and rarely, phone too. These would be queries which could have been legitimately asked in the class, but somehow were not. So, ok, you can ask them now, provided they can be answered quickly. Often, participants, call-up and discuss career options, and looking at the serious nature of the query, I usually devote sufficient time to these. I usually guide the participant to first formulate the question. And usually in a subsequent call, help them to discover the answer.
The first set are paid services, and through them, if one get access to me, the second set are free services with due trust on the discretion of the user. But when a user gets access to the free services, and tries to use that free access to obtain what is essentially a paid service, then we have a case of Service Catalog SubVersion. And once a SC_Sub incident is raised, it might impinge upon the user's access to the free services too.
Yeah, I mean the freebies are always associated with a paid service. Sugar is free with a cup of coffee! How many cubes? ok someone might get away with as many as 20 cubes! But if you start talking boxes? Pl BUY as many pounds as you want. The ketchup sachets are free if you BUY a pizza. And then too, you can take 2 or 3 or 4 or ... ok 8, NOW STOP!!!! For a truck-load of sachets, you have to approach the place where they sell them. We give them free with pizzas!
Pray how many, one may ask, sugar-cubes or sachets are legitimately 'takeable'? This is the difference between a service situation and a product situation. There is no REAL answer to this question. However, one easily KNOWS when the boundary gets crossed. In a service situation (exactly parallel to mens-rea), intentions define legitimacy, not specifications!
Ohhh, sorry, come again, what was that? "What is mens-rea?" Oh. Please sign up for my classes on Indian Penal Code!
Cheers!
Every time a training program is closing, there is a feedback session, where often people voice their opinions. Many communicate with me over email after the batch is over, and over the past few years, I have collected quite a few geniune friends; these relationships have endured over the years, where we keep in touch and report our 'current states', 'whereabouts', career choices, etc.
So, when I got a chat-request from one Varma from Agra, in India, I took it routinely as a participant who wants to stay in touch, nothing more. Over some time we exchanged polite "GoodMornings" and "How are yous".
Now, I don't like to set up the BUSY red-dot on the GoogleTalk - it is kindof standoffish. So, my status is always green. I would rather run the risk of people pinging me at inopportune moments rather than appear uncommunicative. [Ofcourse, this is my blog so it is all about ME. I am not accusing anyone else of being standoffish, so don't get peeved if you happen to set up red-dots all the time. That is your choice and I fully love and respect people who put up busy signs...]
From the last few days, this Varma asked politely whether I would answer queries. I said yes. Then he asked a question. I answered. Then he started arguing about that. Then I told him that I wouldn't be able to engage in a debate with him on chat. If he had simple queries of the "which course should I do before which" types, I could reply quickly. Then I educated him on the difference between closed questions (name two components of priority) and open questions (tell me something about priority model), and indicated that the chat medium is suitable only for closed questions. Then I told him, that delivering trainings is my PROFESSION, so if he needs elaborate answers, he has to get into one of my training programs. Now if you have read so far, your patience must have run out, and so had mine. So, I explained to him that he could ask questions on LinkedIn if he liked, and I would reply publically when I could. The next day, I got a friend request from him on linked in and then I got a question in the LinkedIn inbox which I reproduce here verbatim: "Please advice how Service Operation (SO) maintains a balance between an internal IT view and an external business view. Pleas elaborate!" Phew! So, now the LinkedIn inbox becomes the chat mechanism..!
When I had said LinkedIn, I expected him to start a discussion into which I too could have contributed. This is an invitation to write books without any royalty! So, ultimately I had to do the ultimate... I felt sad, but I have only so many hours in a day (24 last time I counted) and simply cannot devote the time to such open-ended questions.
However, I had to clarify the situation in Service Management terms, otherwise I would not be able to sleep properly. So, bingo! I realized ***Service Catlog SubVersion*** How? Well, as a trainer, I deliver certian paid services. Out of which, there are courses like V2M, V3F, ST, SO, RCV, PPO, MALC, etc. To access these services, participants have to pay the requsite fees. They land into a classroom, and there depending upon relevance and participation of other class members, their queries are answered. The other (friendly) services I provide (yeah, friendly, no extra charge!) are minor queries over email, chat and rarely, phone too. These would be queries which could have been legitimately asked in the class, but somehow were not. So, ok, you can ask them now, provided they can be answered quickly. Often, participants, call-up and discuss career options, and looking at the serious nature of the query, I usually devote sufficient time to these. I usually guide the participant to first formulate the question. And usually in a subsequent call, help them to discover the answer.
The first set are paid services, and through them, if one get access to me, the second set are free services with due trust on the discretion of the user. But when a user gets access to the free services, and tries to use that free access to obtain what is essentially a paid service, then we have a case of Service Catalog SubVersion. And once a SC_Sub incident is raised, it might impinge upon the user's access to the free services too.
Yeah, I mean the freebies are always associated with a paid service. Sugar is free with a cup of coffee! How many cubes? ok someone might get away with as many as 20 cubes! But if you start talking boxes? Pl BUY as many pounds as you want. The ketchup sachets are free if you BUY a pizza. And then too, you can take 2 or 3 or 4 or ... ok 8, NOW STOP!!!! For a truck-load of sachets, you have to approach the place where they sell them. We give them free with pizzas!
Pray how many, one may ask, sugar-cubes or sachets are legitimately 'takeable'? This is the difference between a service situation and a product situation. There is no REAL answer to this question. However, one easily KNOWS when the boundary gets crossed. In a service situation (exactly parallel to mens-rea), intentions define legitimacy, not specifications!
Ohhh, sorry, come again, what was that? "What is mens-rea?" Oh. Please sign up for my classes on Indian Penal Code!
Cheers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
