Conflict

Workplace Decision Making – When Managment Must Make Decisions Alone

Making a decision is not a very easy task. This is especially true when the outcome of the decision can affect many individuals or the make or break of a project or product. Because of this people who make decisions typically seek the counsel of other people. Presidents or leaders have their own group of advisers that can help them in determining the appropriate judgment to certain situations and problems. Even ordinary people ask advice to others when making decisions. However there are also instances when we, as a leader or as an individual, have to decide on our own. Here are some instances that require making the decisions alone.

As a Leader Take Time to Assess Your Subordinates Capacities:

When you are a leader, you can very well asses your subordinate’s capacities. Because of that you can tell if they can contribute to your wise decision making or not. So in cases when you are sure they cannot give out sensible suggestions and solutions then you better do the deciding alone. Anyway, you are the leader which means you have the proper right and cognition to resolve.

Sometimes it’s best For the Leader to Be the Final Arbitrator & Decision Maker:

There are decisions made which can affect the whole group or company greatly. And in this case, only the leader or president takes the whole blame. Because of this, it is important that the leader make the decision alone. Though he can take advises from other people, it is still important that he make the decision on his own so that he will be firm on standing with that decision. Most especially when the time comes that he need to take the consequences of that decision.

On the Other Side Sometimes the Best Decision Is The One With the Least Consequences:

On a lighter side, there are instances when decision making is just a matter of choosing which is better though the consequence will be almost tantamount whatever decision is taken. This makes the decision making barely a matter of personal preference which is easy for any leader to do alone.

Sometimes the Best Decision is Derived Solely from Personal Intuition:

Coming up with your own decision alone is also encouraged when the judgment can be made based on intuitions and previous personal experiences. This is where great leaders are taken apart from not so good ones. The good ones were able to convert their past experiences into something that they can use in determining out their action during certain situations. It is important to remember that our intuition can make us survive during hard times so trust it. Never ever let others’ opinions or suggestions sway your strong intuition as much as possible stand by it all the time.

Emergencies Often Demand Quick Decision Making on the Spot:

Emergency situations oftentimes require quick-decisions that deciding alone is better. By deciding on your own, one need not to call meetings that can only be set when the other individuals are available that is why decision can be made relatively faster. Fast decision making can sometimes save the day so do not hesitate to make one when needed.

Two Heads & Shared Input Can Be Better Though Not Always Possible:

It is true that two-heads are better than one which can be applied when one is making a decision. Nevertheless a little confidence on experiences and gut feelings can make the process also logical. When you encounter the above situations, give yourself the full confidence to decide and take all the responsibility as well.

Robert St. Vital

Robert has many years practical experience in the employment counselling and resume writing service industries

Robert helps both local Winnipeg & overseas internet job seekers find and land Canadian and local Winnipeg jobs on-line

As St Vital frequently says – if you don’t pound the rat ( computer on-line mouse) you won’t get those on-line or in person job interviews.

After all its one big world and one big Winnipeg job shop out there.

logicalfools.com
News, views and reviews. Local Eyes, Global Perspective
http://logicalfools.com/

Peace the only option

Humayun Gauhar

Anyone that thinks that war is an option has got to be a nut. Anyone that thinks that war between nuclear- armed countries is an option should be committed. Nuclear weapons are there to stop wars from happening, not to start them. By that measure Israel’s Netanyahu should be in the nut house.

Peace is the only option, peace that is acceptable to all sides. That is honourable. Else it is not peace at all, only an illusion of it. India and Pakistan are champion illusionists, but illusionists would know better anyone that illusions evaporate very fast.

Pakistanis are a very optimistic people, a most endearing, quality and a very big strength. Any India-Pakistan summit and we feel that peace is at hand. Most laudable, for it underlines not only that we are an optimistic but also fundamentally a peace loving people who want to get on with their lives. Which makes our lack of peace at home ironic, but that is another subject. When our Zardari recently broke bread with their Manmohan Singh in Delhi, we went through naive excitement for the umpteenth time. If you really want peace certain realities have to be borne in mind.

India’s state terrorism particularly in Kashmir begets and reinforces freedom struggles what it calls non-state terrorism. Blaming Pakistan deflects attention from its state terrorism. Sure Pakistan gives it succor as any adversary would, like India did the ‘Mukti Baheni’. But it was our own state terrorism and iniquity against the Bengalis that caused it. India took advantage, as any adversary would.

If Pakistan were to ignore Kashmir the struggle might lose some of its teeth, but only for a while, for soon it will grow new ones. The Kashmir revolt is a creation of Indian intransigence that Pakistan takes advantage of. I have always said: state terrorism begets non-state terrorism. Non-state terrorism will remain no matter how many treaties you sign while brushing cores issues under a carpet dyed in human blood and woven with the weak threads of bilateral trade, film productions and cricket matches. As long as state terrorism persists non-state terrorism will continue. Period. I cannot understand why the world cannot comprehend such a self-evident truth.

India is a large country with a small country mentality whereas Pakistan is a relatively small country with a big country mentality. Ours comes from the millennium-long Muslim rule over India. Conversely, India’s comes from being ruled by Muslims for over a millennium. I don’t know how much currency this theory has, but both countries should have disabused themselves of such complexes by now. India, I feel, is beginning to get out of this mindset with its economic upswing, but it will not be totally eradicated until the next generations in both countries take the helm for they are less burdened by stories of slavery and Partition. Land and population sizes don’t matter, the human condition does. That the majority of our peoples live in abject poverty makes us puny. By that measure – and it is the only relevant measure – Singapore is a much bigger country than either India or Pakistan. Its real resource is the high quality of its leadership and its greater human capital development. By these measures, India and Pakistan are pathetic.

Strong and wise rulers on both sides can bring detente. Neither Zardari nor Manmohan can be accused of either strength or wisdom. Cleverness: yes. Strength: hardly. Wisdom: a big fat no. Only strong and wise leaders can ‘sell’ an inevitably compromise-laden agreement to their peoples without their patriotism being questioned, their opponents making capital out of it and a ratings-hungry media taking jibes at them.

The great anomaly is where real power lies in both countries. It should with the chief executive who is the head of state and prime minister. But both countries are dynasty ridden. So in Pakistan it lies with the constitutionally ceremonial president because he is also co-chairman of the ruling party by virtue of being Benazir Bhutto’s widower. That is where his power comes from. In India, an Italian catholic lady is leader of the ruling party only because she is Rajiv Gandhi’s widow. That is where her power comes from.

Manmohan Singh is a weak, proxy prime minister as is Pakistan’s Yusuf Reza Gillani. Singh belongs to the small Sikh minority and is keenly aware that he has to go the extra mile to ‘prove’ his patriotism in the backdrop of the Sikh rebellion for an independent state during the eighties, the storming of the Golden Temple and the assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh body guards. Gillani is in office at Zardari’s pleasure while he and his son are running from the courts.

Both countries face difficult elections soon, as does their great ‘ally’ America. America will have a determining say in any India-Pakistan deal. All decisions by these three countries now will be heavily informed by the need to get re-elected.

Without the military leaderships of both countries on board any expectation of a meaningful deal is a pipedream. While our army’s role in policy-making is well known, the Indian military’s role is camouflaged. Nothing new: the US military often plays a decisive role in foreign and defence policy. If it did not Iran would have been attacked by the Bush the Brat.

Should we forget the ‘core issue’, Kashmir and the UN resolutions asking for a plebiscite there? Or should we sort it out first. Or, should we put it on the backburner and normalize relations in other areas – which India calls ‘Confidence Building Measures’? Kashmir will not let us forget it as long as a freedom struggles rages there. And it will continue raging with or without our support. In fact, the Kashmiri freedom fighters could even turn on us for abandoning them. As long as the Kashmiri freedom struggles continues unresolved the sword of Damocles will keep hanging over our heads for it takes only one madman on either side to vapourize all of South Asia. Best to do all simultaneously – core issue, other delimitation issues and CBMs – what Musharraf and Vajpayee agreed to, a ‘Composite Dialogue’ and hope for the best. What is needed is simultaneous statesmanship and raw guts on both sides. Leave it to the functionaries and we will continue nitpicking for another six decades.

India and Pakistan should stop tussling over an America-free Afghanistan and arrive at a mutually acceptable understanding. Afghanistan may not want either of us anyway. As if killing ourselves over Kashmir isn’t enough, we cannot go killing ourselves over Afghanistan too.

Illogical demands should stop. Asking for Hafiz Saeed without furnishing adequate proof is illogical. America has to ship up or shape out of the India-Pakistan equation instead of being a fly in the ointment by placing a bounty on Saeed’s head one day and then changing it to a bounty for evidence two days later. If you don’t even have evidence what the hell are you doing placing a bounty on someone head? The only sense it makes is that you are trying to derail the normalization process.

America wants peace for its own reasons.

1.   It realizes that war between India and Pakistan is no longer an option. Another war between them could well mean another World War. The US and its traditional allies will suffer unacceptable multi-sectoral damage, regardless of what happens to India and Pakistan.

2.   It wants to an India free from ‘Pakistani sniping’ to focus on creating an economic and military bulwark against fast-growing Chinese economic and military might.

The conundrum is that while America says it wants India-Pakistan normalization, it doesn’t want them ganging up to form a South Asian Economic Association or some such, which has the seeds of becoming another giant. Worse, Pakistan’s presence could be instrumental in bringing China into the fold as India could Russia. Can you then imagine what a ‘monster’ the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation with the South Asian Economic Association could become? Soon energy-rich Iran and the Central Asian states would want to be part of the action.

They needn’t worry, though. America is so far ahead in the sciences – medicine, genetics, space, computer sciences and so much more – that it cannot lose its position of preeminence though it will certainly lose some of its monopoly. No bad thing for America either, for sharing over-lordship might bring it’s foreign and defence policies into the realm of civilization and rationality.

humayun.gauhar786@gmail.com

Further to – My Boss Will Not let Me Delegate

Yet all in all it can be said to be human nature itself why your boss , supervisor or even spouse will not let you delegate work or tasks away – no matter how busy you are or how much it makes logical sense indeed.

Overall it is very common for the one above you to insist – even demand that you personally attend to certain tasks rather than delegating them away. For example , or as an example in point- your boss might insist that you interview personally and recruit all of your employees , rather than say delegating or assigning the job or tasks at hand to an assistant or even the personnel / H.R. /Human Resources Dept. You might well wonder – what on earth do they have this highly specialized and trained group for – if not for that task itself. It’s as if a person deemed scizophrenic is discharged by his psychiatrist as he is telling tall tales about said doctor in point. If the diagnosis is correct then all told – it should be fairly and routinely expected that the patient under charge of said medical mental health caregiver specialist should be expected to be hallucinatory and indeed telling made up and false tales – and indeed even believing them 100 %. If that patient is totally in the real world – then what on earth is such expensive care – and it being allocated away from other needy patients in the real world – why on earth is the patient seeing the doctor and using up limited health care resources in the community at all.
If the patient is sane – perhaps it’s the doctor who should be chastised not the patient.

Back to the boss and the inherent demands that no matter what, or no matter what has occurred or is occurring that no delegation of tasks can be assigned no mater what. What on earth can be done? As a starter try to talk sense. Work your best to convince your boss, supervisor or spouse – all depending on the situation, that delegation and delegating will bring much better results overall. Then your problem on hand is on its way to a successful resolve. Even or perhaps you can convince your superior to let you run an experiment to try delegation for a trial period.

If you can document that the results are favorable – and resulting in better effectiveness and efficiencies of employees or better yet cost savings or profitability that did not occur before – you can bet 100 % that said boss will take full credit. Keep your mouth shut, be quiet let him or her bask in their new found stardom. Left alone your problem and issues will be put on the back burner – well at least for now.

Winnipeg Canada Job Shop
logical fools

Issues at the Workplace – “My Boss Won’t Let me Delegate”

One very common issue that arises in the workplace is that often bosses and supervisors will not let their staff delegate. Why is this? Is it bosses are lone wolves who get things done all by themselves and hence want their workers to be the same? Or is that the boss will see you as lazy if you “sluff off the work to others” shirking responsibility and unloading a cost center elsewhere? Or is it a control issue on her / his part and they figure out that if you learn to delegate their own position of perks and privileges is at risk? The answer to the above is all of the above, none of the above and that your boss may well be an insecure individual, a workaholic, a control freak and a moron.

For is not the essence of management getting other people to willingly do your work – and even enjoying it. It’s not unlike the relished American tale / fable / story of Tom Sawyer and the painting of the fence. Just to recap – Tom had a chore that he did not relish at all – that was to paint (whitewash a fence). Here is a self taught, even uneducated person who had “street smarts”. Tom stopped any of a number of people who wandered by the alleged work / project asking their advice as to they would advise or recommend to paint the fence.

Essentially by asking advice the whole neighborhood chipped in and painted the fence white stroke by stroke without Tom doing one solitary bit of work. That is other than conning other people to do his job.

Now why on earth would your boss not want you delegate work to others and have the enterprise, organization or business more effective, happy and profitable to boot?

Fire Your Boss
Logical Fools

Why The Movement to Takeover Wall Street

There is enough food, clothing and shelter to take care of every individual in this world. Yet, there are billions of people with no food, clothing or shelter.

When the developed world was selling dreams to their citizens, they failed to inform them that the resources they would employ would be owned by others. These resources would have to be collected, stolen and removed from the third would countries.

No one cared as long as they enjoyed their lives and the dreams. This was capitalism. Money controlling the movement of goods and services. Those who had the money had everything.

When the money started to run out, capitalism developed debt. This debt was sold to the poor nations in return for keeping them poor. However the developed world continued to amass the natural wealth and the luxury associated with it.

I have always maintained that debt is the root of all evil, as the principal borrowed is never going to make the interest payment when looking at it from a Government perspective. The inherent sphere of default lies within the framework of debt.

The US fell from grace, only to take on more debt. It fell again and then it was followed by Europe. What most Capitalists failed to realise was that the populations of the third world may starve to death and not raise their voice, such was not going to be the case at home.

The movement to take over Wall Street is nothing more than the realization that there is enough resource in this world to cater to every individual. Yet for the capitalistic greed many are made to starve, to be without clothes and shelter.

The inevitable has caught up with the greed of the Money Managers.

Abandoned Children

Humayun Gauhar

Once upon a time a man called America enticed a woman called Pakistan, promising all kinds of things that Lotharios always do. The giddy girl fell for it. America fathered many children with her. A woman called Saudi Arabia the midwife every time. One child was named ‘Mujahideen al Amreeka’ and later renamed ‘Taliban bin CIA al ISI’. Another, conceived with ova supplied by the midwife, was named ‘Al Qaeda bin Amreeka’. A third was named ‘Haqqani bin Amreeka al Jaal’. There were many others. America fathered them for a purpose.

After the children had served their purpose the father abandoned them. Naturally, they turned against him and became his enemies. Ever since, he has been doing everything to kill them. The children are killing him back. The children are winning. The father is desperate. He has gone bankrupt. His political system is paralysed. He cannot think logically. He hypocritically blames the mother and the donor-midwife for having fathered them too like self-procreating organisms and also turned on them. But he never blames himself for abandonment as callous fathers do. So he is paying the price, as are the mother and the midwife. Lacking logical answers, America scoffs at those that question it by trying to portray them as inferior life forms: “That was history. This is now. Forget the past”. Pseudo ‘intellectuals’, themselves looking to help America father more illegitimate children, say, “Right on. Look to the future.” Problem is: the past never allows you to forget itself. If you try, the future becomes bleak. That is America’s prime hypocrisy in this region.

Hypocrisy: Times were when Ronald Reagan likened the Haqqani Network’s founder Jalaluddin Haqqani and America’s other children to the “moral equivalent of America’s founding fathers” who were freedom fighters against the British. America’s children then were freedom fighters against the Soviet Union. Today, they have become the “moral equivalent” of freedom fighters against American occupation. That’s the only difference – just a detail.

Hypocrisy: Retiring Admiral Mike Mullen’s assertion that the ‘Haqqani Network’ is “a veritable arm of the ISI” is a parting-kick of desperate petulance. He forgets that the Mujahideen-Taliban, Al Qaeda and the Haqqanis started life as “veritable arms of the CIA”. If America’s callous, hypocritical and irresponsible personality hadn’t caused it to become an abandoning father, they would never have turned against it. America forsook its strategic and moral responsibility of looking after its children and is now reaping the harvest.

Hypocrisy: What would you do if someone broke into your house and tried to occupy it? You would bring out your gun and shoot him, wouldn’t you? Well, that is exactly what the Haqqanis and Taliban are doing. Contrarily, America wants Pakistan to wage war on the Afghan Haqqanis on its behalf because they are killing Americans in Afghanistan. That begs the question: what are you doing in Afghanistan in the first place? It is not your country. It belongs to the Afghans. You have occupied it. They are fighting to free it. They have every right to do so. Wasn’t that the logic when the Soviet Union was the occupier? Or does logic change with occupier? Get out of Afghanistan and young Americans will stop getting killed there.

Hypocrisy: While America wants Pakistan to wage war against the Haqqanis, it itself wants to negotiate with them. What sense does that make? Talk of being two-faced.

Hypocrisy: America allows its unstable drug lord stooge Karzai to cozy up to India, giving it undue entre and influence in Afghanistan. India should be careful. History shows that whoever befriends America eventually comes a cropper, and not just in the Third World. Europe followed crazy American economic nostrums cooked up by bankers who by definition are limited of living on more and more credit. Today their economies have flatlined. Afghanistan has been totalled. Pakistan followed America slavishly virtually from the beginning and today its very existence is being wondered about. Learn lessons from our pathetic histories, my dear neighbours, learn lessons. Don’t commit suicide in an effort to do Pakistan down. Keep pestering us if it pleases you, but for your own sakes don’t do it by getting into bed with America, else you will get an unmentionable disease. We have. On the one hand America keeps needling us; on the other it want us to do its immoral bidding. America is rived with hypocrisy that is harming it more than anyone else.

Hypocrisy: The events of 9/11 started it all. Ten years on and America has still not provided incontrovertible proof that it was Al Qaeda that did it. Oh, I forget, I’m a ‘conspiracy theorist’.

Hypocrisy: On May 2 this year America claims to have killed Osama Bin Laden in a decrepit house in Abbotabad, while many important Americans say that he died in late 2001. But they are ignored as – you guessed it – ‘conspiracy theorists’. No one was shown the body, not even their own media. They claim to have done a DNA test in 24 hours, which experts say is impossible. They quickly dumped his body in the Arabian Sea. They don’t even show us the photographs because they are too gruesome. Since when did ‘gruesome’ bother America? Since they saw the bodies of cooked Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? There goes the ‘conspiracy theorist’ again. When people don’t have cogent answers to what you are saying, their defense is to discredit you by labeling you a ‘conspiracy theorist’. Their puppets parrot them. When the ‘conspiracy theorist’ abuse is hurled at me, I’m convinced that there is something to what I am saying. Yes, I am a ‘conspiracy theorist’ and proud of the label. You keep hatching conspiracies; I will keep questioning them. When you cannot answer rationally and in a civilized manner, you have lost and I have won.

Hypocrisy: America keeps moaning about the growing heroin addiction in its country. Having ‘successfully’ occupied Afghanistan and installing its satrap Karzai there, couldn’t it have prevented the growth and refinement of poppy? The Taliban government made poppy cultivation history. But if America did it too, how could it assert that the drugs trade is financing its abandoned children, when actually it is financing America’s war: enough has been written about how America part-financed its wars in Latin America, Indo-China and Afghanistan through drugs as a matter of policy. As you sow so shall you reap: there was a time when America and Britain deliberately exported so much opium to China that it turned it into a country of addicts. Today China is an audacious world climber and America is a pathetic world descender. Too many Americans are drug (and credit) addicts. Which is worse? Such is the bitter fruit of perfidy and hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is the product of stupidity.

So, my two-faced ‘friend’, let’s forget history and talk of today. European economies are finished. America’s economy is in terminal decline. The dollar isn’t dead yet not only because China keeps it on life support to save its loans to America, its investments in America and America’s investments in China. It is more because the dollar still remains the reserve currency till an alternative is found, which it will be. When people buy dollars (or US bonds), they don’t do so because they think that, “it is as good as gold”. They do so because with all other dollar-pegged currencies also in decline, stock markets in turmoil, equities unstable and real estate falling, they might as well go with the reserve currency until they have something more solid and stable to park their money in. With America’s political system too incompetent to throw up quality leadership to solve its myriad problems, confidence is zero. That, my dear America, is today.

If America doesn’t see sense, stop its hypocrisy and get out of the many messes that it has got into, I wouldn’t bet on it surviving as the global bully much longer. But that is how empires fall: hubris, strategic and intellectual decadence, and imperial overreach.

humayun.gauhar786@gmail.com

In Business Picking a Negotiator Logically

As a general rule Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) should not become directly involved during early negotiations.

Reasons for this strategy and policy are that generally subordinates will make fewer concessions, have larger demands and generally have more time and personal attention available for preparation, preparations and planning.

It can be said that overall its best and wisest to choose representatives based on their negotiating skills rather than strict seniority as an overall policy.

In picking and choosing negotiators and negotiating parties positive traits include:

1)      know how to satisfy the psychological needs of opponents

2)      Strong desire to be liked

3)      Have the ability and abilities to listen carefully while looking for underlying reasons and rationale for what is being presented openly

4)      That the person or persons command the respect of all in the negotiation and negotiating process ( on both or all sides)

5)      Goal orientated

Lastly if there is one general catchphrase in picking out and choosing good and wise staff for early negotiating steps it would include – that they display a logical sense and have shown good business judgment under fire and under pressure.

Canadian Jobs Online – Winnipeg Job Banks

Post Your Resume Free

Winnipeg’s Newest Temp Employment Agency