Are you leading with a mind on your brain?

I read an interesting neuroscience research on how socail nature of humans define the high-performance in workplace....http://www.strategy-business.com/article/09306?gko=5df7f

I tend to agree part of the reasearch in my real-life experience. We often feel utter dispair in working in some environments where SCARF: Scare, Certainity, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness was absolutely lacking in one or more of these factors. We feel restless till we get out of the environment and it was quiet pleasing to realize that the author has put a well defined structure to understand why we feel so and why we avoid getting into such work environments....


However, What made me wonder is that if there is tolerance levels for each individuals to handle the lack of SCARF factors?

In my view and insight it is "YES". Some individuals have higher tolerance levels to handle lack of SCARF factors in work environment. I guess they probably do the following to survive longer in the environment:

1. Ignorance is bliss: They are highly people oriented and lack sharp cognitive skills that allows them to carry on longer in such environment purely due to lack of choices.
2. The Ventilator: They find equal minded people and socialize more to share their work woes with similar collegues and jointly vent out the frustration, which eventually allows them to sustain the lack of SCARF factor longer.
3. Fatalist: People accept that as their destiny and continue to work in such environments.

What do you think?

Viewing outsourcing deal through the Contract lens - Transaction cost perspective...

I was reading an interesting article from Olivier E Williamson, who won the 2009 Nobel prize for economics....Just curious if it was due to Obamanomics (the obama factor you see...the guy who won Noble peace prize for 2009 for just being what he will be (did)/should be (do) than what he is)....He has viewed the entire transaction cost economics from the contract lens...there are few powerful insights that he shared and it reverberated with my current thinking and challenges that I'm facing at work on day-day basis...


1. Contract refrative index theory (This term is copyrighted, dont steal or quote this term ;-): Contracts tries to capture ideal transaction cost, but often the real/hidden transaction costs are visible when it is actually implemented.
How is it relevant to IT outsourcing Industry: Simple you may present great solution and contract it with client, but if you do not have the experience/acumen to see through the real/hiddent transcation costs that may emerge during implementation, you will end up losing the game. maybe not in short-term but long-term.
2. Hostage Theory: All contracts are made for mutual gains and at the same time it should also capture/share losses if the other party terminates.
How is it relevant to IT Outsourcing: Simple no matter how you structure a deal, if either party are not willing to share losses as equally as gains it will be an unsustainable deal (meaning we cant execute the deal without heartburns and with degree of fairness that will leave the client and supplier happy).
3. Incomplete contracts: No contract out there is completely complet in the realm of bounded rationality. In reality there are so many factors to be considered, that it is impractical to nail it down on contracts
How does it apply to IT outsourcing contracts: Common guys (I mean lawyers) just wake up, dont think you have protected your client (i mean in terms of lawyer, the cupplier and the client) from every feasible uncertainity. We are all humans and our rationality is bounded in utopian world but predictably irrational in real world.

So what does it make my position on lawyers/contracts and analysis of why Indian Pure play firms are more successfull in some areas that large outsourcing vendors who have presence in India...I still stick to my view that lawyers overcomplicate things and loose focus that business transactions sometimes have to be based on trust and good intentions....An optimist view not a pessimist view....Have an open mind for the predictably irrational!

Closing an outsourcing deal - Whats your view - An Optimist or pessimist?

Closing an outsourcing deal is one of the most challenging aspect I've ever witnessed...no matter the size of the deal...this is not just in services firm but in product firms too especially if it is a MNC in developed market jurisdiction!

Why is this so complex? I understood that this has got to do with the legalities and these damn lawyers...they make it so complex on the T&C that it is next to impossible to close a deal...By the time you close the deal we loose our breath and lose any interest in celebrating the win....

Lets look at a comparitive view of a large multinational view to contracting vis-a-vis a typical Indian pure play view to closing a deal:

Multinational view: I call it the pessimist view
1. It follows Murphys law, everything will go wrong in engagement and hence cover your ass as much as you can
2. Excessive mitigation and covering of positions through tight verbiage by the service providers on every possible risk there is...

Pure play view: I call it the Optimist view
1. Business done based on trust, assume everything will go right in engagement
2. Very loose verbiage and cover positions on very big ticket items on the contract that potentially exposes service provider to uncovered risks that leads to significant financial/legal/brand impact.

Who gains from all this: a Lawyer or third-party administrator who makes money out of extensive negotiations between client and service provider. Both the client and service provider loose critical time and money negotiating the contract.

Both client and service provider become so desperate to close the deal, the contract hardly matters and the points of disagreements sound ridiculos as they may have such low probability of materializing in reality...

What has been your view?