How's my Luck now?

Reflections, views and descriptions during my stay at IIM Lucknow from July 2004 to March 2006

Location: India

Monday, December 13, 2004

'Global' issues

MBAs are often accused of being bombastic and throwing around terminology that doesn't really mean anything when they actually don't know something. One can get to know the source of this tendency inside a B-school. There is so much terminology being thrown at you everyday that many students pick up those terms and start using them way out of context, where they were never meant to be used. And they also use these terms to try to get out of tight situations, where they are unaware of something. This tendency has been shown time and again in 'Dilbert'. The following part of the post is meant in a completely lighthearted way:

The term used here for 'beating about the bush' is 'globe'. A formal definition (which I just made up) follows:
Globe n. any glib talk that does not have any inherent meaning, is in no way related to the topic under discussion, or is brought up only as a filler of pauses in a conversation

The class (and every class and every batch) is 'globalized' (and becomes a 'global village' in a sense) in this way. Some are excellent at it and they speak nothing but globe. We have one fellow in class whose vocal tone changes noticeably when he globes :). When he starts speaking, we mutter to ourselves: 'ye aakaashvaani ka Lucknow kendra hai, ab aap XYZ se aaj ka globe suniye' :).
I once suggested that Shakespeare must have been an MBA student. Reason: his plays used to be staged at the 'Globe' Theatre in London :). I am also proposing to institute an award for the student with the best 'global' competencies: the Golden Globe award :).


Blogger CycloNurb said...

Here's my perspective on it, there's the other extreme of the spectrum. I'd like to call it 'UTility' talk. This comes from being a PhD student. And the definition is:
UTility is defined as: Unnecessary Technicality in talk.

We have a senior professor from Yem Yaai Tee who is expert at utilitarian talk and says that it is a great thing to write two big volumes of a book that proves 1+1=2. No one would question the utility of understanding why exactly 1+1=2. really. even after reading two big volumes worth of cryptic mathematical symbols that are vaguely related(so you think) to other equally cryptic mathematical symbols in the book.
But 1+1=2 and I know it now.

2:13 PM  
Blogger ASHOK VAISHNAV said...

The profuse of "global" language has seeped in almost all fields of life, so much so that use of simple langauage is considered "Maniben".
Howevr, it is also neccessary to know when to "globe" and when not to.
One can act like a gambler-one who senses risk and plunges into it, for the heck of it- or an entrepreneur- who calucalates risk and thenif rewards are worth the risk, goes full steam- or an "executive"(particularly, the so called 'professional')-who keeps on calculating risks,appoints a consultant and delegates the job to some one, and sets target for an answer.:)

9:19 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home