SMART WORK .. Does it pay in the long run?

[Iyer@Infosys]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

In recent times, in the corporate world the term 'Smart Work' has become popular, slowly eclipsing hardwork, industry etc.

While ideally it should mean intelligent work to complete a task perfectly, yet in the current scenario it is applied to clever, crafty and sometimes even cunning means to accomplish a task at the quickest time. True it produces the desired results apparently.

Brahmins have a reputation for sincerity, honesty, faithfulness, truthfulness etc.

However will it apply in the long run?

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Iyer,

I am of the view that the so called negative qualities can be used for a good end. In Mahabaratha, Lord Sri.Krishna was crafty but can we denounce that? Simlilarly brahmins have to adapt according to the times with the inherent nature being intact.

 

[renuka]

Dear Shri Iyer,

I am of the view that the so called negative qualities can be used for a good end. In Mahabaratha, Lord Sri.Krishna was crafty but can we denounce that? Simlilarly brahmins have to adapt according to the times with the inherent nature being intact.

Dear Sravna,

What is this yaar? Lord Krishna crafty??
No way man.

The Lord's ways are difficult to comprehend but certainly not crafty.

Crafty is with hidden desires and personal gain.

Lord Krishna was "Karmanyevadhikaraste Ma Phaleshu Kadacana" in action.

 

[renuka]

In recent times, in the corporate world the term 'Smart Work' has become popular, slowly eclipsing hardwork, industry etc.

While ideally it should mean intelligent work to complete a task perfectly, yet in the current scenario it is applied to clever, crafty and sometimes even cunning means to accomplish a task at the quickest time. True it produces the desired results apparently.

Brahmins have a reputation for sincerity, honesty, faithfulness, truthfulness etc.

However will it apply in the long run?

Dear sir,

Lots of others too are sincere,faithful,honest etc etc.

I know in today's world..working SMART is the norm but if you ask me personally I feel in the long run..work SMART =Laziness,Insincerity, dishonest and even spoiling the potential and future of others.

When I was in the government service there used to very few of us who will turn up to work before official work time and start work early so that we can see all patients fast.

Most other docs would say "when our work starts at 8am why are you guys coming at 7 am to see patients in ward?"

Others try to run from work and only work when the director is around.

To me it does not really matter even if I was putting in extra hours.. I have even covered other doctors when they go missing in action and was not too bothered to be paid for it too.

At the end of the day..working RIGHT is more important then working SMART.

Those who work RIGHT are not always liked by their bosses..I remember when I was in the government service my director told me "you are dumb to be so hard working..you don't know how to work smart and break rules for personal gain"

He said that cos he was mad with me when I refused to let a local politician cut the queue of patients to see me.
So my director got mad with me for making a politician wait.

It was not an emergency..so why should he have VIP status and cut queue when other people were waiting since morning.

So if you ask me frankly..working RIGHT can never bring bad results..the most is your boss will not like you.

That's why I decided to be my own Boss so that I can work RIGHT.

 

[vgane]

Smartness would help, but scheming would not...In our Puranas we hear the story about Lord Ganesha getting the fruit from the parents by circambulating them rather the world as Lord Muruga did...So is not Lord Ganesha smart?

Smartness is brilliance...It is intelligence combined with practical wisdom...It would definitely help

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna,

What is this yaar? Lord Krishna crafty??
No way man.

The Lord's ways are difficult to comprehend but certainly not crafty.

Crafty is with hidden desires and personal gain.

Lord Krishna was "Karmanyevadhikaraste Ma Phaleshu Kadacana" in action.

Dear Renuka,

See, the most important consideration for Lord is to establish dharma. But as in mahabaratha, you have almost invincible warriors like Bheesma, Drona, Karna etc. it becomes very difficult to win them in direct combat. So Lord Krishna had to use some adharmic means to ensure a dharmic end. So, Yudhisthira was made to lie to overcome Drona, Kunthi had to take promises from Karna not to use nagastra nore than once and several other events like these.

The moral though is clear. Dharma has to ultimately prevail

 

[Raghubir]

People use to tell me, work smart not hard.

That has changed with my outlook in life,

1. Working Hard: Means you go beyond the call of duty at your job without strategic thinking in terms of positioning yourself for smarter ways of working (i.e. efficiency and productivity).

2. Working Smart: You are constantly focused on the outcome, i.e. Car makers start with the price they want to sell their car and work backwards thus pre-planning in reverse occurs.

3. Working Spiritually: Let every step, action and thought be an offering to God. God sees everything so no matter what your style you will be guided to a place that is right for you. Have your ambitions but do not get caught in the output of your good deeds and work ethics. Its merely an offering with love.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

See, the most important consideration for Lord is to establish dharma. But as in mahabaratha, you have almost invincible warriors like Bheesma, Drona, Karna etc. it becomes very difficult to win them in direct combat. So Lord Krishna had to use some adharmic means to ensure a dharmic end. So, Yudhisthira was made to lie to overcome Drona, Kunthi had to take promises from Karna not to use nagastra nore than once and several other events like these.

The moral though is clear. Dharma has to ultimately prevail

Dear Sravna,

Dharma can never prevail when Adharmic methods are used.

In legal terminology I would say that Lord Krishna was right on technical grounds.

He never resorted to Adharma.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

What I mean is lying etc is not considered as a practice of dharma but as you say what Lord Krishna did cannot be considered as adharma from a larger perspective.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

What I mean is lying etc is not considered as a practice of dharma but as you say what Lord Krishna did cannot be considered as adharma from a larger perspective.

Dear Sravna,

On technical grounds, Yudhisthira uttered "ASHWATTHAMA the elephant is dead"

You see he modulated his voice to utter the word ASHWATTHAMA louder than the word elephant is dead.

He did not say "Drona your son ASHWATTHAMA is dead"

You see it was the fault of Drona to not hear Yudhisthira out fully.

It's like us not reading the fine prints/disclaimer below a document before we sign it.

So for all practical purposes Krishna did not ask Yudhisthira to lie.

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna,

On technical grounds, Yudhisthira uttered "ASHWATTHAMA the elephant is dead"

You see he modulated his voice to utter the word ASHWATTHAMA louder than the word elephant is dead.

He did not say "Drona your son ASHWATTHAMA is dead"

You see it was the fault of Drona to not hear Yudhisthira out fully.

It's like us not reading the fine prints/disclaimer below a document before we sign it.

So for all practical purposes Krishna did not ask Yudhisthira to lie.

Dear Renuka,

Why did Yudhisthira have to utter the word Ashwatthama only louder? So there was an intent to deceive Drona, right?

 

[sravna]

When in kaliyuga the Lord appears as an avatar, I think he has to resort to indirect and subtle ways to accomplish His task. The purpose of an avatar is not only to demolish the evil people but also make them realize that they were indeed atrocious in thoughts and deeds.

 

[renuka]

The purpose of an avatar is not only demolish the evil people but also make them realize that what they were indeed atrocious in thoughts and deeds.

Well said..God does not destroy anyone..he is a Patita Pavana(Redeemer of the fallen).

 

[prasad1]

Friends Hold your horses. Take a break before you run off in a tangent.
What do you mean by "SMART WORK"?
Smart as opposed to idiotic? Or you meant smart is crooked?
If you do not want to work smartly then you are working in an idiotic fashion, is that what you want us to work?
Smart work is to achieve efficiency and raise productivity. If someone is working mechanically because has no incentive to do a better work, they should be retrained or replaced.
I started my carrier as an Industrial Engineer. We always were improving the efficiency of the work being provided, by methods engineering or adding new tools to improve the efficiency. The unions will always object because the company benefitted from the increased productivity. So the company had to bribe them with productivity bonus.

Similarly when computers were introduced in 1960, LIC and other unions would not accept it as they wanted to preserve the status quo. That definitely was dumb.

So Mr. Iyer, please explain your term

SMART WORK

 

[sangom]

Friends Hold your horses. Take a break before you run off in a tangent.
What do you mean by "SMART WORK"?
...

So Mr. Iyer, please explain your term

I think that Shri Iyer has explained already in his OP as follows:

"While ideally it should mean intelligent work to complete a task perfectly, yet in the current scenario it is applied to clever, crafty and sometimes even cunning means to accomplish a task at the quickest time. True it produces the desired results apparently.

Brahmins have a reputation for sincerity, honesty, faithfulness, truthfulness etc.

However will it apply in the long run?"

Shri Iyer,

You see, Tabras have been providing their service possibly to the highest bidder, in a manner of speaking. Brahmins if you consider all-India are in no way different from any community when it comes to achieving objectives 'cleverly' and, if need be, by employing a bit of crafty methods when necessary and possible. Hence I don't think we should be alarmed at the newly felt demand for "smart work" as you explain it.

Of course, there will always be some brahmins (and this will apply more or less to all other communities as well) who may not suit job positions which require skills in doing 'smart work'; a good boss/employer should be able to identify such persons and provide them with jobs which do not require 'smart work'.

I can cite my own example. My boss knew that I was sincere, honest, truthful, etc., but that I did not have the skill to 'cleverly' complete all types of assignments. Result : I stuck to a low-profile department mostly signing circulars. I might have lost certainly in terms of promotion and certain other fringe benefits nor could I "shine" among my peers like many others; but what my boss told me was that I would be able to retire peacefully and without any black mark in my service records. That came true and I am ever grateful to that boss.

 

[moodamadayan]

Hi,

Smart work does not necessarily mean negativity- it is hard work + intelligence. Those who try to take a short cut in the name of smartness may benefit for the time being but an honest, hard work will earn its merit- ultimately as there is something called as natural law of justice. Setbacks may be only temporary but the peace of mind one gets from being hard working and honest definitely surpasses the temporary or transient reward one may get in doing a dishonest work.

 

[prasad1]

Mr. Sangom Sir,
You are an exception.

The following is for all.

Show me a financially successful person of any cast who was not worldly Smart, of any community.
My brothers rose through the ranks to be high offices in private company. They were exceptionally brilliant and very successful. They were smart but straight as arrow.

My BIL was the chief engineer of a major port, he too was hard working and smart person. So dont tell me that you can work un-smart and accomplish anything.
I understand that in last 40 years things have changed, the corruption has gone up. But corruption is not limited to any caste or profession.
We went to a temple in TN, the priest came after the puja and made a big show of pomp and ceremony. To our surprise he asked for some money, out of embarrassment I paid him, and he coolly pocketed the money. Is that sincere work or smart way of making some money.

What is this preoccupation with caste in social and financial activity? We are all human and act accordingly.

This site caters to all caste, religions, and nationality. One needs to be careful of the audience who reads this post. Let us not insult other people by words (wether spoken or unspoken).

 

[Raghy]

Greetings.

In effect, Yudhishtra lied. As he was uttering 'kunjaraha', Bheema blew his conch with a loud noise so that Drona wouldn't hear the word 'kunjaraha'. Out of grief Drona laid his arm down and was meditating; Yudhishtra did not try to caution about the death of the elephant when he had the opportunity. Dhrishtadyumna killed an unarmed meditating man. I was told, until that event Yudhishtra's chariot wheels were not touching the ground; hence the incident they came down to earth.

The method Karna killed was cruel to say the least. Divulging Karna's identity may even have averted the war.

Instead of all these strategies, bumping Sakuni off would have solved most of the problems.

Kurushetra war was fought using adharmic means. Dharma can not be established by adhamic means.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Raghy,

The problem with employing only dharmic ways with out and out adharmic people is not very unlike explaining the moral implications to an animal when it comes to attack you. Will it work? It definitely doesn't. So imo there is nothing wrong in being like Krishna when dealing with the evil. In fact that is the only way you can have an effect on such people. But as I said let us not abdicate our own good nature.

The fine point is we should discriminate between the good and the bad and then act accordingly. There is no substitute for a fine discrimination.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Shri Raghy,

The problem with employing only dharmic ways with out and out adharmic people is not very unlike explaining the moral implications to an animal when it comes to attack you. Will it work? It definitely doesn't. So imo there is nothing wrong in being like Krishna when dealing with the evil. In fact that is the only way you can have an effect on such people. But as I said let us not abdicate our own good nature.

The fine point is we should discriminate between the good and the bad and then act accordingly. There is no substitute for a fine discrimination.

Dear Sri. Sravna, Greetings.

'Good' and 'bad' are subjective. From Duryodhana's point of view, all of Pandavas and Krsna would have been considered 'bad'. More over, Duryodhana did not resort to adharmic methods.

Duryodhana believed Pandu should not have become the king. What if Dridarashtra was blind? Pandu could have ruled under Dridarashtra like Baradhan did. If Duryodana thought the kingdom should have belonged to Kauravas, what is so wrong in that? Other than the enemity with Pandavas, Duryodhana did behave justly with others. His kingdom did not seem to have any compliants. He was a dharmishtan; he did not resort to adharmic way of fighting even after loosing all the others. But, on Krsna's signal, Bheema struck Duryodhana 'below the belt' in the final battle, which was adharmic.

Karna was a dharmishtan. As promised to his mother ( he had no obligation to do so), he did not engage with any of his brothers despite repeated provocations by Bheema; used nagastra only once.

Arjuna attacked Bhishma standing behind Sikandi.

Pray tell me, who was dharmic and who was adharmic?

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Raghy,

It all started because Duryodhana denied the Pandavas their rightful share of their kingdom. He was not willing to concede even a village to them. Would you call that fair and righteous? The Pandavas wanted peace always but It was Duryodhana who wanted the war with the Pandavas so that he can wipe them off completely. Is that not an evil intention? He had formidable people with him and thought he can destroy the Pandavas. That was without doubt adharmic. So Krishna had to employ not so straight means to triumph over people like Bheeshma, Drona, Karna etc who were inherently good in nature but fought for an adharmic purpose.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Shri Raghy,

It all started because Duryodhana denied the Pandavas their rightful share of their kingdom. He was not willing to concede even a village to them. Would you call that fair and righteous? The Pandavas wanted peace always but It was Duryodhana who wanted the war with the Pandavas so that he can wipe them off completely. Is that not an evil intention? He had formidable people with him and thought he can destroy the Pandavas. That was without doubt adharmic. So Krishna had to employ not so straight means to triumph over people like Bheeshma, Drona, Karna etc who were inherently good in nature but fought for an adharmic purpose.

Dear Sri. Sravna,

Yudhishtra lost that kingdom in the stupid game of dice. He also lost all his brothers and his wife too. If we go by strict dharmic method, Duryodhana had no obligation to set conditions for Pandavas to get the kingdom back. Seriously I don't consider Pandavas were right even to ask for the kingdom back after loosing that in the game of dice.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Raghy,

OK, Yudhishtra lost the kingdom to Duryodhana but not in the normal way. He lost due to a cunning plan of Sakuni and Duryodhana. Accepted Yudhishtra had a weakness for the game of dice but that was exploited by Duryodhana to achieve his objective. The point is that the kingdom was not won in fair means

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Raghy,

Good and Bad are not subjective terms and just don't reflect the pov's. They can be defined easily. Good is something which has consideration for something beyond the self and the bad is something which thinks only of the self. You can apply this definition to the Pandavas and the Kauravas and decide who is good and who is bad.

 

[Iyer@Infosys]

Dear Forum Members,

I am immensely thankful for your enthusiastic participation and inputs in this thread.

I request more inputs relevant to the current scenario.

This 'SMART WORK' is the predominant mantra especially in the IT and IT Enabled Industry.

For instance, in my organization, in one of the projects, the Software Engineers adopted clever and crafty means to complete tasks, boost productivity and fake quality just to please the superiors. Eventually they cornered some rewards and at the appropriate time, quit the organization and joined elsewhere for better financial prospects. But the SMART worked boomeranged, the project suffered and ultimately the client withdrew the project. The organization lost significant revenue. The faithful and loyal Engineers in the project suffered and had to wait for a long time to be inducted into other projects.

May similar incidents be shared regardless of the nature of industry, be it IT, BT, Telecom, Manufacturing, Finance, Agriculture etc.?

Regards,
Iyer@Infosys