Proof: I am a manager. I just made an unequivocal statement. So there is an apparent paradox. So putting aside the possibility of why the world didn’t disappear in a big flash of light due to this contradiction (which I would not have liked), there are two possibilities. Either the above hypothesis is not true, or I am not a manager.

Revised Hypothesis: An unequivocal statement by a manager may or may not be an oxymoron.

Optimism levels in a project

This graph shows how different teams in a company feel that a particular project will be delivered successfully i.e. within schedule, scope and cost.

Disclaimer: This project is entirely fictional and any resemblance to any project – live or abandoned is entirely coincidental

The society has given the residents an option of limited timings of water supply or private water tankers. The latter options costs money. And the residents of the society have voted for that option.

So an important question to be asked is how should the payment be distributed? Should it be a flat amount for all flats or should it vary according to the number of residents in each flat? The justification of the latter option is a no-brainer. Larger families are likely to use more water than a family of two individuals.

Now comes the interesting game theory aspect into this problem. People with larger families would oppose the proportionate fee structure while smaller families would oppose a flat fee structure. In each case one of the parties would feel that they have been given a raw deal.

Now assume that the flat fee structure is adopted. This means that the smaller families will be disgruntled since they are paying a per capita higher rate than the larger families. Thus they will indulge in wasteful water usage to compensate for the higher fee. The larger families will use at least an amount minimum to their needs. However its more likely that they would be a little careless in using water as they are being subsidised by the smaller families. Overall this leads to wasteful water usage for the entire society.

Now let’s assume that the variable fee structure is imposed based on the number of residents in each flat. Here the reverse would happen. The larger families would be disgruntled and would spend water in a wasteful manner while the smaller families would use at least the minimum share of the water. Overall this option too leads to a wasteful usage of water.

Both these options seem to result in wastage of water. So what then is the optimal distribution of payment? Is there a better way of distributing water? The best option which comes to my mind is to implement a water meter system which tracks the actual usage of water (which may be of course more cumbersome and expensive to implement)

Let’s see what the society management comes up with. Till then out with the buckets and drums to store all the water.

Posted from my mobile: Please excuse grammar and typos.
UPDATE: Well, my society decided not to get into the nitty-gritties of Game Theory and adopted the first option instead! Limited water supply from now on. So much for trying to explain Game Theory to them.

Comment if you like it.

But recently they came out with a self-parody of the previous ad. Two cleaners are cleaning the kitchen which was messed up by Akshay Kumar while another cook picks up the phone and starts playing with it. When the cleaner sees this, he gets frustrated at all the work and taunts the cook in the same laughing tone.

This ad is much clever and full credits to the ad agency of Micromax for bringing out this self-parodying ad. Would this one 4 out of 5.  (Can’t find the link of this ad online)

An interesting piece of news: Micromax leads the pack of local mobile manufacturers (who collectively now constitute around 17% of the Indian mobile market share). Micromax’s share of the Indian mobile phone market is 4.8%

If you’ve watched any of the cricket matches during the ongoing IPL3 season, you must have seen the Adidas ads. There are three ads – one from the point of view of a batsman, a fielder and a bowler. Adidas is well-known for its inspiring ads, and this one doesn’t disappoint at all.

“Sometimes I can fly.” Wish I could write copy like that. Here’s the Youtube link for the ads.

With this post I began a long neglected hobby of mine. Criticizing ads. On TV, in newspapers ads are all around us. Some are good, some are bad and some are downright ugly. This is my effort in tearing apart the ugly, criticizing the bad and appreciating the good.

The ad industry is very close to me, almost like a dear brother lost in the kumbh-mela of the career rat race (…if you can make any sense of that sentence). I begin this endeavour with a few ads which have been making the rounds these days. One of them is the IIFL ad. This is for India Infoline a financial services company who has always seeemed to be struggling to define its brand identity. In its latest move, to renew its brand it has come out with an ad saying it has shortened its name to IIFL (India InFoLine).

Two things against this change. First, the capitalization makes no sense. Random letter capitalized to make a short form. Secondly they have come out with an ad today (http://epaper.livemint.com/ArticleImageEx.aspx?article=31_03_2010_015_003&type=1&mode=1) saying “Short is Great” and justifying their short name with famous personalities like Sachin, Gandhi, Picasso who were of “short height”. This comparison seems like a huge generalization and irrelevant if you ask me. The good thing about this ad is that it has been smartly executed. Short. Crisp. The way I like it.

AdMeter Rating: 2.5/5

PS. May I suggest IIFL to add Kim Jong Il (at a height multiple of 5′3″) to your portfolio for better diversification.

What is more interesting is the series of events which took place there. We first went to the Croma store and inquired about the offer. They said the headphones were out of stock, but you could buy the ipod now and get the free headphones in a week or so. There was an Apple store just close to the Croma store. So we went there to check out the prices. The price was exactly the same in both places. My wife being the way she is, asked the Apple sales guy about the Croma offer. Surprisingly the sales guy was ready to add some value add for us. He offered us a USB based speaker to match the Croma offer. I examined the speaker and found it not too exciting. So we told him we’ll rather buy from the Croma store. Before leaving, we directly asked him if he could match the offer of Tata Croma store and give us a decent pair of headphones. He called up his boss but sadly his boss didn’t agree. So we went back to the Tata Croma and booked an ipod nano from there.

Why I find this interesting is that normally the high-end stores/brands like these do not offer any value-add on their products. It would be rare to see an Apple store in the US even trying to match such offers from let’s say Walmart or some such store. But here in India the equation seems completely different. The exclusive Apple store had to offer a significant value-add compared to the mass retailer which was definitely taking a significant chunk of their sales. Even though the products on both sides are the same, but the sales guy would be taking a hit just because the Apple store couldn’t match the offer. Note that this Apple store was the same one which once offered me to load new apps and games if I bought an ipod touch from their store.

So its Big Bazaar against Converse/Adidas/Reebok, or Tata Croma against Apple, or a local mobile phone dealer versus Nokia Exclusive stores. Unless the branded store can offer some kind of value-add, the mass market stores would kill their sales.  Thankfully some of these branded stores are taking note of this fact. And that is good news for the Indian consumer. But the best way to get such offers – is to simply ask. As an Indian consumer, you are well within your rights to do so without feeling the least embarrassed.