The EXCITING GD experience..... cudn't expect anymore !!!!

Today was the auspicious day for I had decided to attend the GD session this time having missed on the last time. I reached some 20 minutes before time as mentioned and entered to find a GD already in progress. Yes, it was time for some learning. I paid due attention to the members' volitions and felt that tautological points could be dangerously irritarting. Overall, I liked Mr.Shyram's points and his art of cutting through. Mr. Gandhi seemed very cautious of his words while Mr. Hotwall had plausible reasons for his point but at times needed some coolant.
Mr. Sagwell kept the momentum going although his point of the doctor being responsible and hence nearby needed more reasoning. Mr. Maybeveer had his justified reasonings but got his chance within the clamor and seemed to conclude the GD in the midst. Mr. DipakSilly spoke at times with some good interpretations while Mr. Bhalu was quick to cut when Mr.Moonshine made his cameo in the play. The members grew polemical at times but overall it was a good experience and I could see some "never-to-be-serious" faces in great search of some bantering. The point of appreciation was speaking more reasonably than speaking for a reasonably more time. Not to forget, it was the beginning - it certainly deserved an applaud.

Then followed some viewer's points to be noticed. There were some good points raised while some cavilled about some triflings. I felt rarely any point was left untouched but the discussion
could have proceeded in a rather different manner, a manner in which proper attention was paid to all and points were not suppressed but reasonably justified anyway; I mean - "A Discussion Among The So Called Intelligent IIT Souls" !!!!

Next was our turn.... The members took their hot seats and the topic was declared on the board. It ran as follows :-
" You are the manager of a company and you have to promote either a 37 year employee with 5 years experience or a 25 year new lad. You decide on the 37 year old but then come to know that he has been diagnosed with HIV+. What will be your course of actions???? ... PS -> It was later added to the topic by Mr. MaybeVeer that the 37 year old guy will not live long which I felt should have been a general assumption but as an addendum to the topic needlessly distorted and misdirected it.

The following were the elite members of the panel :- (from the left end)

1) Mr. Ideal Vikas (IV)
2) Mr. Biashed Signal (BS)
3) Mr. Prabhu Shankar (PS)
4) Mr. SagWell (SW)
5) Mr. HotWall (HW)
6) Mr. MoonShine (MS)
7) Mr. NameMe (NM)
8) Mr. Riot Signal (RS)
9) Mr. ChandraShikhar (CS)

The GD (Great Discord) was presided over by Mr. ShakeNow (SN) and Mr. MaybeVeer(MV) and then it began.....

There was initially a moment of calm when Mr. BS knocked but was simultaneously cut by a doubt by Mr. RS. Then it was Mr. PS to introduce the topic and everybody bowed to him as to his name.

PS - The topic is about promoting an employee for a responsible position. I feel I would go for the 25 year old as the 37 year old would not live long and then it may be of great loss to the company. ( I think he had done a good job at introducing and then Mr. BS proceeded....)

BS - The 37 yr guy is experienced and already selected and can't be left out just for a small reason like that. (Mr. NM had till then sensed his right time for his stored trifling.)

NM - Talked about promoting the 37 yr old guy as it would induce a feeling of fraternity and healthy environment in the company. And that his experience cannot be ignored.

SW - But the company has to keep aside certain emotional aspects to run in profits. Above all, many employees are dependent on it. ( A good point raised)

IV - Supported him and added that the company might run in losses if it took that policy.

HW - He was already selected and so its pretty clear that he is more deserving . (A reasonable
entrance)

BS - Gave arguments in support and that the grounds on which he is removed would need some
justifications. In a similar case, he might take legal action.

MS - Supported BS and justified the benefits based on his experience.

SW - The 37 year old guy might not be mentally stable to take the responsible post in that case would not justify his position and hence the 25 year old guy should be promoted. (A very good point I felt but was seen by Mr. BS with travesty - cut short unmanneredly).

NM - Removing him just for the reason he has HIV would enhance his hopelessness and would make him mentally more unstable .

( Then there was some discussion on the life expectancy of the poor 37 year old guy. While some expected him to live for about 10 more years, others would assume no more than 5 and some had serious doubts about him rising up to check the results of the discussion. Finally Mr. MV altered the topic as in post script which marked Mr. HW shift from 37 year to the 25 year guy and then began a different story.)

(The next part of the discussion was between Mr.BS and Mr.HW . Mr.BS still supporting the 37 year old and taking legal actions while Mr. HW thinking over the company's losses. It was an eye-to-eye discussion and the rest of the members got enough time for some much needed break. Each of them seemed belaboring their points and post discussion Mr. RS also expressed his irritation listening to the circumlocutions.)

Suddenly from within the clamor came a clangor :-

IV - We should go for the 25 year old guy as the 37 year old guy might die in the middle of any
project and then it would be a big problem for the company.
RS - Supporting him... The 25 year old guy must be promoted and the 37 year old guy made his
mentor so that he can learn from his experiences.( A good diversion but missed out on a
single note - salary. How can a mentor be paid lesser than his subordinate. Increasing his
salary too would divert the question and then the other way would require justice.)

NM - Made a note of the salary point but was cut short.

BS - The 37 yr may be promoted and the 25 year made his subordinate so that he can learn
from him and later replace him. (Seemed very reasonable)

PS - Discussed something about technician and manager and that the 25 yr is talented and
should take the post to reduce risks.

SW - The manager should meet the guy and make him understand the situation and the
circumstances under which he is promoting the other guy. (Supported PS with further
course of actions - liked the approach)

BS - The manager should meet him, test whether he is fit for the position, mentally strong
enough to handle it and then decide the further course. If he finds him fit enough, he should
go on with the experienced guy or otherwise..... (greeted with mixed reactions- a manager
and a psychologist and then asking a guy in a world where in interviews, most of them are
affected and bent on shamming himself.)

CS - The 37 yr guy must be given preference based on experience and his health taken proper
care of. (Late but great)

Time for conclusion by each announced by Mr. SN.....

IV - 25 coz he is talented enough to learn fast and emotional aspects be kept aside.

BS - 37 coz HIV is no ground on which he can be left out. He has several qualities in his favour
and then it would better the ambience of the company.

PS - 25 coz he has life with him and in the long run would prove to be more useful.

SW - 25 supports PS arguments and that he would be mentally sound to take the position.

HW - Finally 25 coz the other guy can die anytime and leave a project in the middle with none to
fill in a short time. So better to go with the 25 guy.

CS - 37 coz HIV doesn't matter here courtesy his talents and he can work for a considerable time
till the other guy gains experience.

NM - AIDS doesn't cause sudden death and hence 37 yr guy coz he already deserves more and
we can train a replacement under him in the meanwhile.

RS - 25 coz he is also talented; a company symbolizes a large group and the interests of a larger
group should not be risked for an individual.

CS - 37 coz he can produce better and quicker results and is already more deserving. Also the 25
year old can be trained under him to take his position later.

Thus ended the Great Discord......

It was an entertaining experience accompanied with learning. A good timepass for all during which none's mind swayed to the end where Sachin was batting and providing a good start. Everybody benefitted from their or the others' mistakes & reasonings and are in eager wait for the next...........

HAIL MECH !!!!

(With candor, I proclaim that this blog is not intended at ridiculing anyone or bringing out any secret enemities. It is intended at bringing forth the interesting experience I had and can serve as a piece of memory, also where we can learn something and apply later. I have tried to be bit uncanny in approach and might be wrong from a certain angle. If anybody finds any piece cantankerous or any remark caustic - I apologize and please let me know of any amendments required. By the way, your views and comments are as ever WELCOME !!!! )

THANKS A LOT FOR YOUR SLIGHTEST LOOK AND SPARING YOUR PRECIOUS SECONDS............