Who? Me??

I really do not see how is it any different from any other enterprise? I looked up the wiki page for Social Entrepreneurship, here’s what it says -

Social entrepreneurship is the work of a social entrepreneur. A social entrepreneur is someone who recognizes a social problem and uses entrepreneurial principles to organize, create, and manage a venture to make social change (a social venture). Whereas a business entrepreneur  typically measures performance in profit and return, a social entrepreneur focuses on creating social capital. Thus, the main aim of social entrepreneurship is to further social and environmental goals. However, whilst social entrepreneurs are most commonly associated with the voluntary and not-for-profit sectors, this need not necessarily be incompatible with making a profit.

How in the world is this any different from what a good business does? It recognizes a social problem (read loosely as a problem that the society in general faces), and it solves the problem. For any enterprise, over a period of time there will be performance metrics – profit and return merely build sustainability. These would be needed by the social entrepreneur as well. So what makes it any different? Social capital is also created by enterprises. If you go through any of the annual reports that a firm publishes, they have this term – Goodwill.

If good will is not social capital, then what is? I think social entrepreneurship is just a term invented by hacks to make themselves feel good. Or maybe its just a marketing gimmick for generating funds.

PS – Before you hit the comment button to rant, do not misread me. All I am saying is that any good business is as good as any “social entrepreneurship”, then why make the difference? Is social entrepreneurship the new green?

It’s a thought experiment that I would want to share with you all -

1. Divide the blog’s content into content which I want to share on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc
2. Tag the posts accordingly
3. Create separate feeds for each tag
4. Sync the right feeds with the right media

That way, intended audiences could be targeted and on different spaces. All through a single blog

I often contribute to the team blog of the company where I work. It is fulfilling, where else can you blog at work

In the past two days however, the team blog … specifically my posts have come in the spotlight. By a critic … the comments are coming from a different perspective, maybe by someone who has engaged with the philosophy and found it either too abstract or too disillusioned.

The outcome being that there is criticism about the ideology and some more criticism about the author. Personally speaking none of my blogs have ever attracted much traffic, so I never had to face much applause or critique other than my immediate circle of friends. Critique from an unidentified source, adds that element of mystery and even a little bit of surprise (Ohh!! Someone does read my stuff!).

What I have not picked up over the 4-5 years of passively active blogging I have done is … how to handle criticism. A post I recently found is pretty good and maybe it will help other bloggers as well, so sharing it here.

– Appended –

Pallavi commented that the critique might just be a different perspective or a different opinion. The final choice of taking that is always upto us. I looked back at the comments I was getting, and have decided to take the new perspective and try something new on the team blog. Will update once I get the results.

*** Disclaimer: I am not a Shiv Sainik, or a Congress fan. I just do not like the end outcome. ***

In the recent news, we saw how multiplexes refused to air MNIK, and how central government arm-twisted them into airing the shows, much to the chagrin of MNS. With threats of violence, people of the city still braved to see a hindi movie.

All in all, it’s interesting to see not the event, but the actual outcome … who has “won” and who has “lost”

Shiv Sena: Once again written off by everyone as a wannabe. Once again people thinking that the party is unnecessarily resorting to violence. Fighting for the right cause, but for the wrong issue and in the wrong fashion.

MNS: A missed opportunity to come together with the original party. Raj Thackeray could have shown to the people of Mumbai that he stands for the marathi manus and supports the cause. He is clearly fighting for the wrong cause.

Central Government: Having over-ridden the local parties in local matters, now Congress has higher say over MNS and Shiv Sena combined. What should not have been their jurisdiction has been given over to them on a silver platter.

SRK & Karan Johar: They were but a tool for grabbing this opportunity of who really controls the city. I hope they realize that they are not adding any value to the city of Mumbai, and that is what Shiv Sena is against. If you are living in this city, if you are feeding off this city, then please invest in it. Obviously, all this publicity is always good for their ilk.

Multiplexes: With ticket prices touching Rs. 250 onwards, profits soon rise. This almost seems like a win-win situation.

But what about us, the people, the marathi manus?

Marathi Manus: By far the clear loser in this entire muck-up. The one party who stood a chance to represent them has now been effectively silenced – silenced by the people who can afford those tickets. What about the people living in Mumbai who do not have that much expendable income? What about the people who see their homes being taken away from them simply because all the commodities are becoming expensive day by day? The backbone of these people has been broken. Broken by a trivial issue.

The photo is taken during one of our sojourns at lunch. A derelict police chowki in such a shambles. Are my taxes being properly utilized? Or are they being used to maintain public property like so??

Just a random thought … why do all Chetan Bhagat novels have integers in the title?

• One night at a call center
• Two states
• Three mistakes of my life
• Five point someone

Is this by chance, or by design?

At a common friend’s wedding, a friend and I had an interesting discussion on nirvana. The discussion started from the idea of how does one go about becoming inside-out. Prompt came the answer from hom, that one should not take external factors into consideration. One should act because one wants to and not because it has been forced on someone. I have known him for a decade or so now, and I think he really practices what he preaches. The problem with that reasoning is that sometimes an individual is not just responsible for himself, but has other obligations (family, job, friends, etc). This binding to the society ties us to worldly problems.

For this reason, when an individual seeks to move towards nirvana, he first needs to take the consent of his family. This consent gives that person a freedom to be inside-out. That act cuts off his liabilities, and he can then transcend to a truly enlightened individual. A person who chooses to do so without the consent of his family and dependents, is merely a selfish person who chooses to ignore them.

PS – not gyaan, but just an observation.

A discussion with a friend about salary structures resulted in this post -

1. I am damn scared of an IT raid
2. Paying corrupt officials the salary and perks that they dont deserve
3. Paying for infrastructural developments that dont help anyone
4. Reducing the deficits of the nation
5. If I do it, then everyone else could also do it

Despite all this cynicism, I still pay my dues … and I think that gives me a moral authority to demand the same from my fellow Indians.

All it takes is an idea.

I am fascinated with God. Obsessed even. That’s precisely why I have jumped out of bed at midnight and started writing this post. This post came to me as an epiphany (yes, even I have those  every now and then).

God is a concept people made to turn internalists into externalists. The concept turns them from someone who believes that his outcome/success is in his own hands to someone who believes that there is a supernatural force who is acting in his/her divine wisdom. It’s a concept which turns lions to lambs.

This to a confirmed pro-theist, is kind of an eye opener. An atheist friend of mine will be more than happy to say, “Gee, Kida, I told you so. I was right.”

But I still have faith. I still believe in god, not as an excuse to turn into an externalist, but simply for the purpose of having and nurturing faith. Believe in god, but not for the sake of that exam/interview/proposal, etc. All those things are purely in your own hands, and if you don’t move your lazy arse on the hard work required, then trust me, no god will be able to help. Chance, perhaps, god … no.