Do choices help?

Life can be described as an act of making 'choices', at its unitary level. No matter what we do or do not do - we choose, so much so that not making a choice is also making a choice. Agree? Good! Given how crucial 'decision making' is to life, good or otherwise. Shouldn't ‘how to make a sound decision’ be taught in schools? No matter what we study, which school we 'accept' to go to; we mostly learn 'what' and not 'how'. When I mention school here, I mindfully limit my comment to graduate school. Masters and above; the education system expands to not only 'what' but to also 'how' and 'why' - education becomes exciting. The unfortunate part is that less than 5% people in our country actually cross the threshold of 'what' as a result; despite having a lot of information, not much by the way of knowledge is in practice and therefore decision making is demonstratively suboptimal, more often than not. Knock on effect of which is seen in unfulfilled dreams, unrealised potentials and an endless chase of the unimportant and in some unfortunate cases even that of the irrelevant ones. Psychologists have been researching this phenomenon for a long time (about 200 yrs in a structured manner to give you some perspective), the quest has been to find ‘what is the best way to decide’. Whilst the blueprint is still in the works but a lot of progress has been made in unearthing practices that do not contribute to effective and efficient decision making.

In this write-up, today, we intend to discuss one such principle called "Paradox of choices"; Barry Schwartz, an American psychologist, who is a Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College, has been among foremost academicians who have not only taken upon themselves to understand the relation between 'choices', 'happiness' and 'success' but have also been writing extensively on the principles of selection associated clinical disorders and its sociological impacts. It is warranted, that I share with you that I landed upon his works when I was conducting my deep research on minimalism. I got intrigued by the concept when one of the professors mentioned the term 'essentialism' in an online class that I was taking a few years ago, under a Yale University program. He mentioned ‘essentialism’ and I was quick to mention how 'austerity' is a virtue as old as the Indian culture, itself, in the land that I come from. We got into an exploratory one o one chat, after the class, which lasted for about 1.5 hours that night (for me and it was midday for the professor), in which we tried to outline the difference between owning nothing or less with sacrifice in mind and being mindful and therefore only possessing what is absolutely needed. It was an enriching exchange, I must add. Professor Bloom is a practising minimalist and also a leading 'intentionality' consultant for the rich and the famous of not just the corporate America but also the DC sharks. He handed me a folder (OneDrive sharing ) which had all kinds of material, from PDFs to videos to interview links etc and he asked me to come to the book; "Paradox of choices" at the end of it. I dutifully obeyed him.

When my exploration of the study material ended, I requested for an audience with him in which I yielded my learnings and expressed how grateful I was to him for the wealth of knowledge that he selflessly shared with me. The conversation ended in me taking a pledge to give essentialism, a try with an open mind. I have made satisfactory progress since but still not quite there. My sense is that I will take another couple of years or so to get into the folds completely. COVID19 induced lockdowns have delayed my progression or should I say has stunted my growth process, as an additional level of simplicity has been forced upon us from the lifestyle changes so I can’t include these 7 months in all fairness, to claims of my furtherance in the journey of minimalism. I have recorded my learnings in two articles that I wrote this year, will embed both towards the end of this one so that you could give them a go too (If you fancy those kinds of things)

Before I get into the core principles, the finding, and the ways in which I think we can work around the perils of decision making, I am going to share with you two experiments that were done in the Yale University and at MIT.

Experiment 1.

Name - Pensioner experiment.

Steps.

1. Large groups of corporate workers were sampled and called upon to attend a seminar and a one to one, investment pledging consultancy program.
2. The groups were divided into several smaller groups, keeping in mind the statistical principles around sampling.
3. The first group was called in and were presented with 6 options of investments and they were then requested to make a choice. Choices were recorded.
4. 2nd group was given 16 to choose from and then were asked to make a choice.
5. The size of the options was increased by a number of 10 for every progressive group that was to come for the education and then selection until the choices numbered 106.

Conclusion

• With every 10 more options added the rate of participation dropped by 2% to 5%.
• It came to a zero when the numbers ran past 100 (Cognitive equivalent to ‘Too much, I can't handle this anymore’)

Experiment 2.

Name - The Jam taste.

Steps

1. Honouring the statistical sampling rule, a group was chosen and then broken down into several smaller groups.
2. The first group was presented with 6 flavours of Jam and then requested to taste them followed by the requirement to make a choice.
3. With every progressive group, the number of options was amped by a count of 10 and the participants were made to choose, till the choices reached 66 (keeping in mind the limitations of taste pallets and human’s ability to distinguish between similar tastes in quick succession).
4. Data of selection was recorded and then analysed further.

Conclusion

• Was identical to the first experiment, with every increase of 10, the participation dropped by 2% to 5% and decision making became impossible at the count of 30.

These experiments were carried out across the world in various settings with all kinds of people, but the results almost always matched with the first one. So for lack of conflicting evidence, these conclusions were accepted as principles.

I do not wish to align the tone and the tenor of this write up with the academic paper, from which I borrow, therefore, whilst I present the findings to you, I will take the liberty of simplifying a few things to make them readable.

Broadly, there are two kinds of people when it comes to decision making.

1. Maximisers
   • This category looks for a lot of options.
   • Conduct deep analysis on everything and for everything. 
   • Struggles to make up their mind.
2. Satisfiers
   • They decide by the rule of the threshold, and then they pick one among the first few things that make sense to them within the specification.

Before we move forward, I think there is a need for me to add my voice to what professor Barry calls denouncement of ‘official dogma’ illusion of freedom is presented to people in the variety of choice. The general view and popular belief are that more options mean more freedom, it, however, is a fallacy. Having the necessary ‘freedom’ is superior to having many versions of the same thing. Because enormous choices bring three problems with them, which cause poor decision making.

Paralysis of decision (Getting lost in choices)

• Over-analysis leaves us with decision fatigue, as a result, we either make poor choices or are stuck in indecisiveness for eternity.

We end up less satisfied upon making a choice (Also called Buyer's remorse)

• It is rather easy to imagine that we could have made a better decision which subtracts from the joy of enjoying the fruits of the decision that has been made.
• Feeling of loss of having not tried the other options.
• ‘What if loop’ - If we had decided the other option?

Opportunity cost (As economists put it)

• The illusion of value depends on comparisons in most minds and not on usefulness, therefore, satisfaction, from the item when it can’t be compared with anything or a limited number of things, go high, when we have a lot of options to compare our selection with, redemption takes a dip.
• Escalation of expectation, the more we see, the more we desire; robbing ourselves the possibility of being pleasantly surprised.
• 'I choose better but I felt worse' is the syndrome that catches on.

Steps to overcome the “Paradox of choices”

• De-clutter as many things as you can.
  • Imagine, if you just have one pen and you had to write - you would just pick it up and get down to writing. Now think that you had a jar full of pens, you are likely to waste a few minutes thinking which one to pick. Remember the pen does not improve the quality of writing so the choice although available in abundance, in this case, is futile.
• Automate as much in your day, as you possibly can.
  • Have a uniform (Similar colours), so that no time gets wasted in deciding 'what to wear'.
  • What to cook/eat, plan and stick to it, to save time, do not decide at the moment.
  • Bring routine in your life, perform most things unthinkingly, as the act of brushing in the morning.
• Time blocking - set a deadline to make a decision.
  • Committing to the time will save you from ruminating endlessly.
• Elect from whatever you’ve - remember options do not improve choices beyond a point.
  • Make a choice and move on.
• Financial threshold.
  • Commit to budget, do not overstep it.
• Taking a different perspective.
  • Ask for advice, it is ok, to follow those you trust (As long as those you trust are not politicians)
• Being clear of the 'goal/purpose'.
  • Without a target, you can’t take a good shot.

Remember the quality of life does not improve when you have a lot to choose from, the quality of life improves when you use what you have 'better', when you are mindful and intentional about what you do. The world is not a stage and you are not a showman, if anything you are a mere letter in a small plot, one which is smaller than a grain of sand, in this vast universe, ends of which are still unknown to humankind.

So make do with what you have, do not let "illusion of freedom disguised in options" mess with the quality of decisions that you make.

Till we meet again.

Here are the other two articles that I spoke about.

http://www.lavkush.co.in/essentialism-care-to-try/

http://www.lavkush.co.in/digital-minimalism-a-must/

Method to the madness!

Prudential algebra, the Benjamin Franklin way of plotting ‘pros and cons’?

Or the ancient Persian way of ‘deciding twice’: once when sober and once when drunk?

Or ‘decision science’ is where you get your juice from, as the New Yorker points out that it is Barack H. Obama’s decision method -  a research field at the intersection of behavioral economics, psychology, and management?

Or do you prefer the Charles Darwin method of listing possibilities?

Or do you find yourself close to the ‘Gandhian method’, that stems from principles of morality, quality, civility, humanity, inclusivity, and collective good?

How do you decide? Do you have a method for it? If not why? Is there merit in having one? Are some of the things that I wish to explore with you, today. The art or as many call it the science of decision making is perhaps the most essential skill one needs to own, not just for sustenance but also for success. We make hundreds of choices each day; some more critical than the other, but decisions nonetheless. Every decision necessitates a definite consequence. If it happens to be a sound one, outcomes are balmy and if it goes south, things turn ugly. Therefore, it is crucial to pause to analyze the process that we might have for arriving at decision. At this stage, for argument's sake, let’s admit that all of us have a method, it's just that some of us recognize it and others do not, but trust me when I say no human mind is devoid of one.

While we’re at it, let’s bust the most common myth, the oldest surviving decision fallacy: Lack of knowledge/intellect causes poor decision making, undividedly. 

This is believed to be the gospel by many but it is not entirely fact-based. I am not saying that information and intellect are not useful in making a selection but I am simply saying that it is not the ‘sole’ contributor in decision making. Knowledge deficit is not an issue as much as, behavior deficit is, let me give you a few examples:

Common facts are known to most if not all. 

1. Carb/sugar is poison. 
2. Wearing a seatbelt (even on the rows behind the driver) saves lives. 
3. Smoking kills. 
4. Not reading ‘good stuff’ makes us dumb.

Yet, these blunders are choices that billions of people make every day over the known ‘right choice', and the science behind it, completely’; as I said, awareness is not always the issue, the behavior is. A person who makes the weighing scale arc beyond the healthy mark and those with a special medical condition, let’s say diabetic, hypertensive, cardiac issues - know that the voluptuous bite of burger, will set them back by a few weeks of hard work (assuming that they have been refraining) and yet when presented with one, they hog it, in 8 out of 10 incidents. And while at it they also order a bag of fries; some in guilt override even finish the job with ice cream (with disproportionate amounts of creme). Have you ever thought why some of us slide on the hideous slope? Behavioral psychologists explain, it is because of the combined effect of the below : 

1. Present Biase: Absitation, in this case, is hard work. Which even if observed is only going to materialize into tangible results in the future but letting go, being slothful, rewards here and NOW (the bite). So most people go for it. 
2. The emotional context of the pleasure centers: Social contract accounts for a lot of what we do, an enclosure full of reckless burger eaters, tricks your brain into believing that after all a burger can’t kill and then you intellectualize in your mind, while you have already queued up for the order, that, "I have been on salads for nearly 7 days, I have earned it". So with a smile broader than usual, you order double cheese and whatever else it is that you enjoy consuming.
3. Fear of losing out: We’re motivated more by fear of loss than possibilities of gain: not taking the bite looms larger than the possibility of being on the healthier side of body mass, in the long run. So at the moment, burger seems like an ok thing to do so you go for it.

Human beings are irrational subjects but in the most predictable ways, therefore, as long as you are able to tame the ‘cue, routine, reward’ cycle as the ace writer Charles Duhigg defines in his book the power of habit, which is to say that behavior accounts for more than information in decision making, you'll be fine. But what is also true is that all circumstances that we face are not an outcome of routine, we often encounter unique situations, to which we have zero familiarity with. That begs that question, how should we approach decision making in those cases? A few examples of those scenarios are: 

1. COVID has dented the business substantially, should I, therefore, rationalize the cost structure of my organization now, or wait for the situation to unfold a little more? 
2. Which job offer should I take as both of them promise to pay nearly the same and are in the same city? 
3. Should I marry or not? What my ideal match will be? 
4. What should I learn next? 
5. Which investments make sense .. which is dud? 
6. Who to befriend and who to actively avoid? 
7. How polite is it too smooth? 

You catch the drift, I hope?

Decision making is often an art of juggling between conflicting objectives and undiscovered options. You’ll never have all the information that you need, security will seldom be answered conclusively and yet you’d be required to exercise your choice and sometimes without much notice too. What do you do?

I think we have succeeded in doing a good job in setting the context right. We’ve defined the issue at hand well, we gotta now unravel the solution part of it. And before we get there I must in the benefit of full disclosure, admit that I have made many terrible choices, straight up unwise ones when measured against the common parlance and I also can’t even say with certainty that I have never repeated a judgment error, in my life. But I must also place in your knowledge that I have been intent on discovering the art of decision making for over 16 years, now.  I have read a wide variety of philosophers and observed modern-day exemplary decision-makers to better my own process. I have also written about decision making (12 articles in the last 10 years, you can find them on the website)

So, when you learn what I have to say on the matter, take it for what it is worth, no less no more.

What you’ll register from here on is a condensed version of a discipline that I have created for myself, and so far it has served me well or so I think.

Step 1 - is to figure out what is it that matters the most to us? Or put differently, what makes us most appeased. 

• Is it wealth?
• Does intellectual indulgence count above everything else? 
• Do you crave for happiness in the conventional sense the most?
• Is morality and social justice, the mission of your life?
• Do you get motivated by societal positioning, which is about going a bit over the top in the display of possession?
• Are health and emotional well being most dear to you?
• Are you looking for love and a sense of belonging? 
• Or you simply want the ZEN, like peace?

Or anything else? 

Decisions are the vehicle on which we travel to the destination of our life goals, therefore it is vital to sort out what we really desire for first. It is crucial to not haste here: take your time, speak to your friends, family, and most importantly your mother: she knows what you want more than you do. After you’ve made up your mind on your life goal(s) and related priorities, give it some resting time. Let say 90 days or so, revisit the list again, and if then also it makes the same sense that it did when you originally created it, chances are that you’ve hit the GOLD. And if you feel like you need to change a few things, go right ahead: it is your life and there is no deadline for this activity. The goal is to know the thing that you deeply desire at a level much deeper than what is easily influenced by superficial worldly influences. After watching the BATMAN movie if you want to be one too, you know it can’t be your life's GOAL, because there is JUST ONE BATMAN!   

Also, at this stage you must know that :

“We judge ourselves by our intentions, but others by their impact.”

Let’s scope our decision-making process to say that we’re blocking important and interesting decisions like the items listed below, from our endeavor

1. What to watch on Netflix. 
2. Android Vs iOS.
3. Youtube Vs TIKTOK.
4. Kohli or Dhoni.

We’re trying to narrow our conversation on rather uninteresting aspects of life, those decisions which often mean more than one thing. Things that have an impact on our lives in the medium as well as the long term. The set of decisions that help us get through the familiar part of the day are important but they do not determine the quality of our lives. Who we are today and what we will be tomorrow are a function of the other kinds of decisions that we take; the ones that require cognitive investment: logical thinking, rationalization. Matters that require intentionality, are the ones that we are going to talk about in this article.

The decision is a statement of intent, in fact, the most potent one.

As significant as the intention is to a decision-maker is, it is also open to interpretation by others, who may or may not be impacted by it. Opinions are not the same as facts and therefore must be taken with a grain of salt. We should shape our system of decision making, by trying to be rational, comprehensive, progressive. Inclusive, moral, and most important of all ‘right’. A smart man once said ‘when facts change I change my mind’; when one of his discussions was called into question, by the press. From peace to war; every outcome at an atomic level is a decision. 

It is comforting to know that no one ever walked on the planet without making poor choices. A bad decision is undesirable but not completely avoidable. It is humanly impossible to effectively insulate the decision-making process from error. No matter how bright you are you’d still make regrettable choices, it is ok, do not beat yourself over it. It is, however, crucial to have a system of making decisions, so that you get is right more often than you get it wrong.

Actions work best when they are themed to a carefully chosen principle. I personally believe in the three value systems that we will go over one by one. In my view, it provides beliefs needed to form a sound decision-making process. I credit the below philosophies for all the right decisions that I took in my life. And I attribute all the decision errors that I have made thus far to a shortage of discipline, intent, and sometimes even bleak desire to make them right. 

1. Stoicism: Stoic philosophy can’t be discussed without mentioning the stalwarts who propounded this line of thought, eloquently :
   1. Seneca  (4 AD - 65 AD)
   2. Marcus Aurelius (121AD to 180 AD)

I have had the good fortune of reading writings of both of these heavyweights, in the university: It was not an extracurricular reading, philosophy was one of my subjects.

Other thinkers have also spoken and written about Stoic philosophy but I find these two thinkers most prolific. If you were to deep dive you’ll find that “Stoicism is a school of Hellenistic philosophy which was founded by Zeno of Citium, in Athens, in the early 3rd century BC” (Wiki will also tell you this)

So what does it really cover?

The virtue of action, tolerance, and self-control, it professes remaining calm under pressure and avoiding emotional extremes. Personal improvement is at the very core of this philosophy. It simply mentions that everything that happens in our life is a result of connected cause and effect. It says that we can only respond by adjusting our attitude towards the prevalent circumstances. This discipline is about accepting the worst possible scenario and actually living it a few days a year to know what it is like to face the worst fall. It advises against making anger the response but leans on the side of intellectual arguments. It propels, that it is going to be ok in the end. This principle is also dead against, empty hope, passion, and mindless motivation. It is about being objective and free from emotions to the extent possible. 

2. Buddhism: It is about confronting suffering by practicing compassion. Budhha seconds, blowing out the flames of desire, by living in moderation, ‘the middle way’. Four important aspects of this philosophy are :
   1. Suffering exists.
   2. Suffering is caused by desire 
   3. We transcend suffering by managing our desires.
   4. If we change our outlook the changing circumstances won’t impact as badly.

Buddhism is about converting Ignorance into wisdom, Anger into compassion, greed into generosity. It teaches us to focus, to internalize the world around us, and to give. It tells us that peace is the ultimate goal that we must go after. I’m not detailing the origins of Sidhartha and how he became the enlightened Budhha because I assume most of you already know about it.

BR Ambedkar’s writing on Buddhism is worth reading

3. Essentialism: Disciplined pursuit of less. Less is more! It does not mean that you should aim for less - you have every right to desire wealth, materialistic pleasures, or just about anything that you deem fit. This philosophy is about attaining those goals by removing the vital few from the trivial many. It talks about devoting all your time and resources only to the things that really matter. It does not advocate “I will do everything”. It teaches us to declutter our lives, being intentional about what we do, and not diving into every pool that we find in our way. The principles of minimalism are also covered in it. Do more with less, be productive, and not busy. It speaks about, not following the pattern, but finding one’s own path and then pursuing it with laser-sharp focus. 

You should read Greg Mcknew to learn more about this philosophy.

When I try to converge these philosophies to find workable guidelines, I take the below out.

Tool Kit : 

1. Saying “NO” is ok. You do not have to say yes to every opportunity. Less is more!
2. Delaying decisions is better than taking the wrong one. 
3. Pro and Cons is important for maintaining objectivity 
4. Emotional wellbeing is displayed by not letting sentimentalities cloud judgment
5. Be aware of your biases and work actively to shield your decisions from them.
6. Be compassionate and be willing to share the fruits with those who deserve it. 
7. Always be on the right side of the moral principle in doing so uphold the law of the land, too. 
8. Stand for what you believe in even if doing so is the hardest thing to do at� the moment.

With that, I take your leave. I hope you found it useful. 

Remember, you have to make your own framework, pick what is right for you, and then run with it. 

Essentialism, care to try?

People have, I’d assume unintentionally, made possessions the yardstick of success. A large part of who you are gets defined, at least, socially, by what you own; consumerism is a powerful force. Trade and commerce control society in ways that we do not often imagine. Patterns of consumptions are studied, newer consumer vulnerabilities are identified and then products and services are conceived to play into that sentiment. Not all of what is being sold is sinister, we aren’t nomads or cave dwellers, we surely need things to comfortably live by but the question is that do we only own stuff that we need or are we surviving with less or have we amassed a lot more than the need? What we ‘need’ is a rather elusive question, people are almost granted to answer it in affirmative when asked on conformance. Let’s agree it is not easy for everyone to concede that they are ‘hoarders’. The place of courage from which such an admission might come is as prized as it is rare. 

Let’s test ourselves, shall we?

Make a list of all your possessions, everything that you own, down to the smallest pin, both inherited or bought - everything! And then map when was last that you actually used the article. Creating a simple table like the below one should help you get a handle over it.

Serial Number	Article	When was it acquired (approx)	Why was it acquired (vaguely)	When was it used last(approx)

Do not intend to finish this in quick 30 minutes because you’ll not be able to. When you start documenting items you will end up listing most frequently used items first and as you exhaust such items your pace will grow weak. At this point take a break, make yourself a nice cup of coffee and start from one corner of the house, or let’s say from one of the rooms and start listing everything that you see. Open drawers, boxes, suitcases, cupboards, everything. It will be an excruciating exercise, you’ll certainly want to give it up. Midway this exercise may seem pointless and a colossal waste of time too but trust me, keep up with it. Do not give up on it. It is ok to finish it in the course of the week or even a fortnight. There is no rush to reach the finish line the same day. While if you can do it there is nothing like it.

After you’ve scanned every corner of the house and listed everything that exists in your home, take a count of total items, and then put a filter on all the items that were used at least once in the last 90 days. Divide the count of items used at least once in the last 90 days with everything that you possess.What does that %age look like?  

20% ? 

30%? 

Or somewhere in the middle? 

Let’s say that if you have scored anything more than 50% then you’re already in a great state of health. Lower the % deeper the hoarding issue. We are good at going with the flow, we give in and try to compensate for emotions with items, the only sad truth is that articles do not compensate for the void, at its best it only distracts us from the core issue temporarily, but that is all that it does. Think of it if what you do not use regularly actually doesn’t add any real value to your life and therefore if it were to not exist your life will not be any less good or bad or any different. 

Clutter is easily the item that you have not used in the last 90 days and yet possess. It not only takes physical space but also attention and much more than that by means of housekeeping. It also tells us that we have not been intentional about acquiring stuff and in the process have created a heap of unused and therefore unneeded items. This is just about you, now think what this might be doing to the ecology and the environment of the entire planet? Imagine if all 7.5 billion of us only possessed items that we actually used, the world would be free of at least 60% of the stuff and therefore the burden. 

Global warming and increased risk of not creating sustainable living would not have been an issue, as grave, as it is today.

Creating a sustainable environment is a result of creating a mindful lifestyle and in that direction minimalism is a great step. I’m not professing for sainthood here, nor I’m asking you to get rid of everything .. it is not recreating ‘the monk who sold his Ferrari’. My pitch is for us to become intentional about what we own, and by extension what is that we let accumulate around us. 

Coming back to the exercise, that we spoke about: 

#1 Try and sort the list in descending order, that is, items that you have not used in the last 90 days should appear first in the list.

#2  Start from the top and go to the middle point of the list.

#3 Pack the least used items in boxes/containers/suitcases and stash them away in a safe & dry place.

Spend the next 6 months on the items that you are left with, that is all that you use on a day to day basis and some more. Remember you do not have to deprive yourself of things that you love and would want to have. In this exercise you are only trying to be a little more mindful of what is around you, that is it. Should a need arise, you can always dip into the storage and get the items that you wished away as part of this exercise. It is an okay thing to do.

The thing to note here is that you will need to keep updating that table that you just made. So that you have a view of what has been happening with your usage and items.. A log of all additions.

When the six month period gets over, take another stock, which is another look at the table.

You would have by then lived 9 months with items that you frequently use and a little more. Think, is it going to be possible for you to give away/sell the rest 50% items that remained locked in the storage for 9 months (barring seasonal clothing/items)? If you can, it will be a great start to a good life, a life without clutter of items that you may not need.

It is not easy but if you can get this straight, you will be on the path of becoming a minimalist, which is a great thing not just, ecologically, environmentally but also economically. The mindful living will teach you the important virtue of abstention; hopefully, you will be able to control your urges to buy and hoard, better.  Remember you still have 50% items that you had available to use, again make a list of items that were least used and try and give up about 10% of those to the storage.

Living with less, creates more of things that matter, like free spaces, lesser economic burden, and more happiness. When you declutter you give yourself an opportunity to wander less and concentrate on things that matter most. I’m not an expert at it, nor have I become, a minimalist completely but I have made some good progress, a few things that I've accomplished are:

1. Simpler wardrobe: I wear similar clothes at least 20 days a month, that is a white shirt and black trousers. I haven’t gotten over my love for shoes so I still have quite a few of them out. Gotta work on it.  
2. Digital decluttering- I was in a mindless upgrade game, I used to hoard every gen item that I could lay my hands on. Multiple items of the same category. Many phones, computers, tablets, headphones, smartwatches, etc. For over a year, I have been able to become singular, one MacBook, last-gen iPhone and apple watch, one pair of headphones, one iPad and that is it. One item each category.
3. Subscription - I used to hold more than 30 annual subscriptions of all kinds of services, from music to application to platforms. I’ve simplified it, to one subscription per service that I like and enjoy. Thereby cutting about 60% of the mindless digital hoarding.
4. E-Reading : I pride myself on being an avid reader, as a result, I would easily buy close to 200 books every year, I have reduced it to less than 50, I try to read more digitally now.

My life has become objectively better not just clutter wise but also on the level of finances. Not having clutter makes me feel more fulfilled, focused and usually relaxed. 

On the work front I used to be obsessed with information, I needed to know everything that was happening around me, every version of it. In the last two years, I have been able to actively reduce useless information hunger and have tried to concentrate on the job at hand, just that, it has improved my productivity.  

I no longer obsessively check and refresh email every now and then, I have a routine for it. I check emails three times on a typical workday. I still end up replying to everyone but now the emails do not interfere with my creative work. I’m able to focus. My phone used to be full of notifications from social media, news, and other applications, I have turned off notifications as a result, I now check on them when I have the time for it.

These small alterations have made me a little more aware of my surroundings and have helped me focus better. 

It is definitely worth a try .. I recommend you give it a shot.

Until we meet again!

Gandhi, as modern-day CEO!

Founding father of world’s largest democracy was tried for treason in the modern-day capital city of the very state he was born in, nearly two and a half-decade before his life long efforts bore fruits - yes, such is the veracity of time, what is a known truth today, may in the days to come, fade into a mere build-up to the greater reality. Before we go any further, I’m duty-bound to inform you that I’m a fan of Bapu ( can’t say the greatest but yes one of significance ), every line, every word that you’ll read here on will drip my admiration for the greatest Indian ever, the Mahatma, so if you happen to be someone who doesn’t like him as much, you may leave this article right here, enjoy the holiday that his birthday grantees to every Indian! Coming back to the historic trial, our beloved barrister did not particularly win cases, in fact if we judge him, on the ratio of victories in the courtroom, he might well come out as the most unaccomplished lawyers of all times, but this man was not meant to be just an advocate, he carried in this heart and soul letters that bore meaning which far exceeded usefulness of any rule book. In his argument, Bapu said and I quote.

“Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection for a person or system, one should be free to give the fullest expression to his disaffection, so long as he does not contemplate, promote, or incite to violence.”  

Justice Broomfield, who was in awe of the short, skinny & funnily dressed Indian man went on to sentence him but how he pronounced the judgment celebrated Gandhi, the man in no uncertain terms. Historians write that he frequently visited Bapu in the jail with the stated intention of forging friendship with the jewel of India. He even titled Mohandas as his spiritual friend in the book that he wrote after his retirement. Think of the audacity of the situation here, a British judge that finds a man guilty of treason against the British empire, goes out of the way, denouncing tradition to celebrate him in every way possible. Our Bapu was such a man!! He was less of a man and more of a living miracle, it is a pity that most Indians (87% according to a survey done by Sriram publication house) have not read even one full book on father of the nation. if you happen to be one such person, go grab ‘my experiment with truth’ today, you would not regret it. Before I get to the title of this article, let me underscore the degree to which circumstances now have changed. How the societal fabric that held values dear and regarded it above all else has found greater love in material manifestations; therefore, natural love for such powerful principles may not be as evident in the present times as it used to be then. We’re a society that values sensationalism over sense, chaos over clarity, histrionics over history; great moments do not get created over ‘viral’ semantics, history is created slowly, one moment at a time and it almost always is without frills. 

In keeping with crazy times, I want to imagine Bapu as a modern-day figure, someone with responsibilities of pleasing not just principles but also materials and targets. So, I imagine him as a CEO, and in doing so, I try to explore which among the values that he demonstrated superbly in the Indian freedom struggle would he practice in the 2019 avatar. Here is my pick. 

Truth: Gandhi can’t be imagined without truth, in an organizational setup, therefore, I presume that he would have created a culture of candor, one in which people spoke their minds freely and fearlessly. Political correctness, sugar coating & diplomatic recitals must have been things that he would have disliked the most and should situation demanded even acted against. He would have professed Satyagraha, (Sanskrit and Hindi: “holding onto truth”) and that would have meant pure ethical business conduct. Shortsighted, penny wise pound foolish practices like mindless misreporting, treacherous misrepresenting, wilful misguiding; putting things under the rug, creating a smokescreen, stealing information would not have existed under his watch uncontested. He was a compassionate man but not in situations that demanded action, the way he called off non-cooperation movement when it turned violent teaches us that he would have been extremely heartless and curt in curbing things which he did not find righteous. In his world, it was not about taking the most profitable however unethical but the right decision, always. He knew to march ahead and lead just as well as he knew to stop and retreat.

Democratic dissent: Mahatma neither lacked confidence nor will, he was, in fact, the very opposite of weak; so he would not have surrounded himself with spineless ‘yes men’. He in his role as a CEO would have encouraged diversity of views, he would have welcomed intellectual challenges, even the most difficult & daunting ones. Bapu believed in merit and originality; he was dead against lifting information from open sources without quoting creator. Historian Ramchandra Guha writes that he fired his temporary assistant (not naming him because he was a timid man and has earned nothing more than anonymity for the character that he showed) on a visit to England, when he found that the assistant  cleverly stole Franklin’s line from one of his journals and produced it to Bapu as his own, on the matter of civil liberty. Bapu was a well-read man, he found out in an instance and showed the man the door. He knew to dissent like nobody I have read about or know did. Bapu knew that to encourage people to come with their original ideas he would need to create a culture of acceptance and respect and I sense that he would have done exactly that, even a CEO.

Love and Compassion: Hate the crime and not the criminal, he exuded love and compassion even for his opponents in measures equal to what he bestowed upon his supporters and followers. He would have made sure that ills of favoritism, nepotism, red-tapism, did not exist in the org that he led. He believed in reformative actions which essentially is about understanding the depth of the problem, from that we can conclude that he would have disallowed superficiality and hollow problem-solving. He was an ardent egalitarian, therefore, he would not have rendered deferential treatment to people basis tenure, caste, affluence, color, regionality, etc. As a CEO, he would have respected his competition and not bad-mouthed them. He would have shown no malice for those who chose a path different from his, he would have done everything possible to create a framework that encouraged people to understand before they concluded matters. He would have built an organization with bricks of empathy and care. 

Sardar Patel, Deputy PM and Home Minister of Independent India, reached Bapu in the week that Godse took him away from us forever to pursue him to allow security personal guard him and to let for thorough frisking of all who got near him or the premise that housed him, as he started building his argument on the threat that the agencies had picked up. Bapu told Sardar, could you come to the point quickly Patel, I’m getting late for the evening prayers. 

So, I’m concluding it here in the shortest possible way that for Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, CEO, India incorporation; ends would have never justified the means!

On that note, Happy Birthday Bapu and thank you for all that you did, spoke and wrote about. You continue to be my superhero!