AEBN

05/04/2026

🎯Why is guiding, motivating & driving a team towards a goal not sufficient to be a true leader?
🎯Why is the role of a manager more critical than that of a leader?
🎯Why is it not necessary to conduct performance appraisals in secret?
🎯Why do conflicts and crises need to strive for the best?
🎯Why is every act we do in our life out of “Fear & Hope”?

If you are interested in these questions, flip the pages of from the other side of the book. Even if you don’t entirely agree, I promise you will find the journey enriching! Dive in—who knows what new insights might resonate with you!

BW version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/0dlpNjeh

Colour Version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/0fXeytZl

05/04/2026

I am humbled, honoured, and privileged to meet Sanjay Mitra Sir and unveil a copy of my book. If I had to describe Mitra Sir in three words, they would be "People", "Process", and last but not the least "Passion". I am blessed to have had the opportunity to work closely with him since the beginning of my professional journey. He has been instrumental in guiding and shaping my formative years. By observing him, I learned a great deal, and those lessons continue to stay with me.

I did my best to incorporate all that I learned from my mentors and industry stalwarts into my book, with the intent of creating a comprehensive guide for young professionals.

I am grateful for the courtesy and warmth I received during our meeting; it was a treasured moment that I will always cherish.

Once again, I thank Sanjay Mitra Sir for all the support and guidance throughout this journey.

Available @
BW version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/0dlpNjeh
Colour Version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/03G42aJl
🎯https://lnkd.in/gKRnVbtY

22/02/2026

Please go through “ ” . Your # means a lot to me, so if you find it valuable, I would truly appreciate it if you could leave a review on Amazon.

If you think it could benefit others, I would be grateful if you could also share it with your friends and team members. It might be especially helpful for new people managers.

BW version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/0dlpNjeh

Colour Version
🎯https://amzn.in/d/0fXeytZl

25/12/2025

WILL AI OVERPOWER HOMO SAPIENS? A MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION

Will AI overpower Homo sapiens? This is perhaps the most frequently asked question of our time. I have tried to articulate my perspective on this matter in the sections below. I found a strong resonance with my thoughts while reading "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari, which encouraged me to summarize my views more clearly.
The answer to this million-dollar question may not be found in the present or the future, but in the past. To understand it, we must go back at least 30,000 years.

SECTION A: THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE MUTATION

Around 150,000 years ago, Homo sapiens were still marginal beings, despite having acquired the power of fire. They could scare away wild animals and consume cooked food but had yet to reach the top of the food chain. At that time, sapiens were confined to East Africa. Approximately 70,000 years ago, they began migrating to other parts of the world and drove other human species, like Homo neanderthalensis and Homo erectus, to extinction. During this period, sapiens were archaic—no different from today—and lacked any extraordinary powers that other similar species possessed. Their communication was similar to that of other species within the genus Homo—like chimpanzees & monkeys, —all of which could express danger, love, and hunger.
Around 30,000 years ago, an accidental mutation changed the neurological wiring of sapiens and bestowed upon them the power of imagination. Until then, Homo sapiens, like other advanced animals, communicated only about objective realities—such as warning fellow sapiens about predators or information about finding food—with limited sounds. However, after the "Tree of Knowledge Mutation," sapiens began to develop a rich language capable of conveying detailed descriptions through multiple sentences with distinct meanings.
The truly unique feature of our language is not just the ability to relay information about our immediate surroundings but also the capacity to discuss things that do not exist at all. Legends, myths, gods, religions, and nations are creations of human imagination. While many animals can warn others by saying, “Careful, a lion!” sapiens can take it a step further by saying, “The lion is the guardian spirit of our tribe.” Sapiens are the only beings capable of talking about things they have never seen, touched, or smelled, using their shared imaginative power. This ability to discuss imaginary concepts is the most unique and powerful trait of Homo sapiens. In the following paragraphs, we will explore how the power of imagination enabled sapiens to ascend to the top of the food chain, even leading to the extinction of fellow species and their rule over the planet.

SECTION B: THE GOSSIP THEORY

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising it unlimited bananas after death in a "monkey heaven," but you can achieve this with a sapiens. The greatest power of sapiens also represents their greatest vulnerability. It is quite possible to take away all of a sapiens' possessions by promising limitless property in an imagined afterlife. Imagination can be dangerously misleading and distracting. However, fiction allows us not only to imagine things individually but to do so collectively. Common myths born from human imagination—such as gods, religions, states, and communities—provide sapiens with an unprecedented ability to cooperate flexibly and work together in large groups without having personal relationships.
Some might argue that ants and bees cooperate in vast numbers, but they do so in a rigid manner and only with close relatives. Our chimpanzee cousins can cooperate more flexibly by forming friendships, hunting together, and standing shoulder to shoulder in conflicts. Their social structures tend to be hierarchical, led by an alpha male. Like their cousins, sapiens are also social beings, but group sizes were relatively small, ranging from 25 to 100 members until the cognitive revolution. Sociological research shows that the maximum natural size of a group bonded by gossip typically hovers around 150 members. Most people cannot intimately know or effectively gossip about more than 150 individuals. Even today, a critical threshold in human organization is around this magic number. Any organization with fewer members—be it a business or an army—may not require a written rule book, as such a group can be managed through shared intimate relationships.

SECTION C: THE POWER OF MYTH

How did sapiens manage to surpass this critical threshold, eventually founding cities with millions of inhabitants, forming nations with billions, or cultivating shared beliefs among billions of sapiens? The answer is that large numbers of strangers can cooperate successfully by believing in common myths created from human imagination. Any large-scale human cooperation—be it a modern state, a religious faith, or any organization—is rooted in myths that exist within the collective imagination of the people. Sapiens can cooperate in extremely flexible ways with countless strangers because of their shared beliefs, which arise from their imagination. This is why sapiens are able to dominate the world. Humans possess the unique ability to create concepts that do not physically exist.

SECTION D – BENEFIT OF LIMITATION

Returning to our original question: Can AI overpower humans?
Most of the living beings possess four types of power: physical power, sensory power, emotional power, and analytical power. Humans have a fifth and uniquely significant power that sets them apart: the power of imagination. This power allows humans to create new things and tell stories about concepts that do not exist. In contrast, AI has only one power: the power of analysis. Unless AI becomes so advanced that it can start imagining and creating stories about things that don’t exist, it cannot overpower humans.
Additionally, humans are not yet capable of creating a processor that mimics the human brain and encompasses all its cognitive characteristics, including the power of imagination. This limitation of humans may ultimately protect them from being overpowered by AI.

20/12/2025

40 - 50 - 60 — WHAT'S THE ADEQUATE WORK HOURS?

A recent statement from industry leaders advocating for longer work hours has sparked considerable debate within the sector. This raises the question: is a 70-hour workweek really necessary?

The topic is inherently complex, subjective, and sensitive, making it challenging to sum up neatly. However, I would like to share my thoughts on the matter.

To begin with, the discussion about work hours mostly pertains to traditional employees working for others rather than entrepreneurs, athletes, politicians, and similar professionals. This distinction is crucial in our analysis.

From an evolutionary standpoint, the human brain is wired for survival. Generally, we tend to be quite lazy; unless we're pushed into a survival situation, we often don't exert our full effort. History shows that humanity has advanced in response to survival challenges. If push came to shove, we could easily work 168 hours in a week if our survival depended on it.

Workers in developed nations can afford to work fewer hours than those in developing nations because their ancestors toiled endlessly to improve their nations' standing. Meanwhile, individuals in developing nations didn't put in the same level of effort, widening the gap.

Moreover, it's not just about logging long hours; it's also about working smart and delivering quality. The Industrial Revolution, despite its many downsides, ramped up productivity and reduced the reliance on manual labor. Initially, machines were viewed in a way similar to how we view AI today. However, those who embraced machinery gained a competitive edge on the global stage.

Since individuals in developing countries struggled to combine smart work with hard work during that era, they now need to blend both approaches to bridge the historical divide. There's simply no other way.

Returning to the question of how many work hours are adequate, it is directly proportional to an individual's interest and inversely proportional to their ability. Let me unpack that.

As noted earlier, the concept of work hours doesn't apply to those pursuing their passions. When someone is involved in something they enjoy, their level of interest rises significantly, resulting in increased engagement hours. A musician, a writer, or an entrepreneur often loses track of time while creating a song, crafting a novel, or innovating. So, greater interest leads to more hours spent working.

It's also important to recognise that everyone has unique abilities. Some people are simply more skilled than others. For example, Person A might complete a task in one hour, whereas Person B might take ten hours due to their lack of skill, assuming both have access to the same resources. In this case, what Person B can achieve in a 70-hour week, Person A might accomplish in a typical day. Therefore, longer hours don't necessarily equate higher output or added pressure; it all boils down to individual capability.

Consequently, each Person must undergo their own personal industrial revolution, which means honing their skills to boost efficiency. If someone is highly capable, they may not need to work 70 hours—or even 60. It all hinges on the quality of work and the speed at which it is delivered.

So, the mantra should be: Skill up, Speed up, Stay up for your future generation.

02/11/2025

ITS NOT ALWAYS ABOUT TEAM

**“Great Work, Team!”**

We often toss these three words of appreciation in our workplace for day-to-day achievements, as well as for achieving major milestones. This practice is good and it plays a crucial role in uplifting team spirit and enhancing morale. When we express praise for the entire team, it reinforces the idea that our collaborative efforts are what truly propel our success forward. Each member’s contributions are vital in driving the team toward our shared goals.

Perfectly alright—this is what should happen in ideal situations. In an ideal world, we would expect to have a team where every member contributes equally, each shining in their unique strengths. This is a dream scenario, and it certainly would be fantastic if it were the norm! Yet, the reality can be quite different from our expectations. Although it may be uncomfortable to acknowledge, the 80/20 principle often applies here as well. Typically, only a handful of team members show immense dedication and effort in working toward the team’s objectives, and more often than not, there will be one standout individual who plays a pivotal role in our achievements (this not necessarily the team manager).

When we offer praise the team vide a blanket statement, we often unintentionally group everyone in same bracket. Although our intention is to foster teamwork and emphasise the importance of collective efforts, this approach can overlook the unique contributions of those who deserve to be recognised individually. In every team success story, there is will always be a "player of the match" whose outstanding performance deserves special recognition alongside the broader team acknowledgment.

Why is this distinction important?

While it may seem that singling someone out could potentially affect team morale by disrupting the notion of equality. But the fact is, equality is a myth; it does not exist. Uniqueness is a reality and natural. No two individuals are equal by the law of nature, and therefore, their performance for a particular task under given circumstances will definitely vary.

When we recognise the team, the average performance of the team becomes the benchmark, while if we give special attention to the exceptional one, it automatically raises the bar of the benchmark. This not only emphasises meritocracy but also inspires others to strive for excellence and elevate their contributions to the team.

An Assamese proverb states, "তুলসীৰ লগত কলপটुवাৰ মুক্তি" (Tulasir logot kalpatuwar mukti), which translates to "The kolpatuwa (sheath of the banana plant stem) gets salvation along with the tulasi (holy basil)". The proverb conveys the idea that some individuals naturally shine in their roles, often compensating for the shortcomings of others. It’s only fair to ensure that we don’t dilute the acknowledgement of those exceptional contributions by treating every team member the same, as this undermines the principles of meritocracy. Those who may lack the ability or willingness to contribute should not be masked by the broad strokes of “team” appreciation.

In the military, recognition is given to individuals rather than entire units for acts of extraordinary valor, skill, or leadership. This is done to set higher benchmark and celebrate meritocracy.

The next time we find ourselves in a moment to celebrate the team, let’s take a moment to identify that remarkable individual who was especially instrumental in achieving our goal. How do we pinpoint this standout among the many contributors? It can be challenging, especially when multiple team members have played significant roles. However, there is usually one individual whose impact stands out.

To identify this exceptional person, consider the impact of their absence. If we imagine the team without each member one by one, assessing the overall impact, we will likely discover one individual whose absence would significantly reduce the chances of achieving our goal.

That individual is the one who truly deserves two more words in addition to "Good Job Team”.

Note: The credibility of this method highly depends on an unbiased approach.

05/10/2025

01/10/2025

THE GOLDEN RAYS AND THE GUILT

As the golden rays of sunlight pour over the city, Jatin steps outside the office, a bit earlier than his usual routine, greeted by the warmth of the afternoon air. It's a wonderful feeling, a refreshing escape from the fluorescent lights and confined space he’s been in for hours. He takes a moment to enjoy the lively atmosphere and the beautiful hues that paint the sky, a perfect end to a workday that he had been missing for quite some time.

However, just as Jatin starts to feel that sense of freedom, a wave of anxiety floods over him. Suddenly, instead of focusing on the stunning sunset, his mind races with worries. Did he leave too many tasks incomplete? Was something important forgotten? Instead of enjoying the beauty around him, he’s caught up in a whirlwind of thoughts about work that still needs to be done.

Does this resonate with you? Do you also experience anxiety and unfulfillment, starting to look for pending work when your day ends early, like Jatin?

Project Management Institute South Asia

21/07/2025

THE FALLACY OF HAVING A STAR IN THE TEAM

I am an avid cricket fan and often find myself drawing parallels between cricket and the corporate world. Recently, a thought has been circling my mind and solidified while watching the ongoing Test series between India and England. India lost the first and third matches but won the second, thanks to the spirited and skilful bowling of Mohammed Siraj and Akashdeep. In the Champions Trophy, too, the Indian bowling unit performed admirably despite the absence of Bumrah, contributing to the championship win.

If we look at India's greatest-ever Test series victories against Australia in 2021, it was evident that with the departure of star players one by one, the Team's performance was enhanced step by step and eventually gifted India the best-ever away series win. Statistics show that Siraj's performance decreased substantially when Bumrah is in the lineup. Similarly, in the early '90s, the presence of Sachin Tendulkar almost overshadowed the contributions of other batters. Currently, India's top-order batting is at its best when compared to the last 6-7 years, and surprisingly, two of the biggest batting stars of the previous decade, Kohli and Rohit, are not part of the mix.

Are these observations mere coincidences, or can we draw a consistent theory from them? Does the presence of a star player deteriorate the performance of others? Does it diminish the overall team performance? I am uncertain about this theory, but when I view it through a lens of conformity, it reaffirms itself again and again.

Has anyone experienced a similar situation in their Team or workplace? Have you noticed that the presence of a star performer sometimes hinders other average or steady performers from delivering their best, thus deteriorating overall team performance? If so, what could be the probable reasons?

👉 Is it due to the lack of motivation among average performers that the star performer receives all the attention?

👉Is it because average performers do not get the necessary resources, the star receives their preferred resources, while average performers are left with the leftover or second-choice options, further impacting their performance?

👉Is it because average performers become overly dependent on the star performer, hoping the star will handle all challenges and resolve issues?

👉Is it because average performers develop self-doubt when comparing themselves to the star performer, who seems to overcome challenges easily and complete tasks effortlessly?

👉Is it because the presence of a star performer makes the system people-driven rather than process-driven?

👉Is it because of all of the above reasons?

Conversely, can the presence of a star enhance team morale and performance?

I welcome any thoughts or experiences on this topic.

07/06/2025

LESSON LEARNED FOR PROJECT & BUSINESS MANAGER- OPERATION SINDOOR

First and foremost, I pay my respects to the Martyr of Pulwama and Poonch and extend heartfelt sympathies to the grieving family. This sacrifice will not be in vain and will always be remembered.

Considering the sensitivity of the topic, I will attempt to be measured, precise, and responsible in this post to prevent any escalation.

If you read the previous sentence carefully, it encapsulates everything I want to discuss on the topic today. I will uphold these four words—"Measured, precise, responsible, and non-escalatory"—from Sri Vikram Misri, Foreign Secretary of India, throughout my life. These four words can serve as a powerful tool in conflict resolution.

According to Western theories, there are five methods for resolving conflicts: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating. In a similar line, Indian philosophy suggests four approaches known as "Saam" (persuasion), "Daam" (bribery), "Dand" (punishment), and "Bhed" (division).

Conflict is an inherent part of both our personal and professional lives. Not all conflicts are harmful; what truly matters is how we address them. Sometimes, we may need to resort to competing or the Dand approach to resolve our conflicts. Suppose a competing(win-loss) strategy or the exercise of power (Dand) effectively resolves a conflict. In that case, there is no harm in using such tactics to achieve the project or business objectives. However, our choice of this method must be measured, precise, and responsible to minimise escalation.

MEASURED: “Tighten the screw till it does not break.” In a business context, there are numerous scenarios where we must take a firm stand to resolve conflicts using power, pressure, or punishment. For instance, if a supplier or contractor consistently defaults, we may need to invoke clauses related to risk purchase, liquidated damages, penalties, suspension, or termination. Similarly, if a customer fails to meet obligations such as timely payment, the service provider may exert contractual pressure through suspension or termination. The key point is that we have diverse options for exercising power, pressure, and punishment within the framework of the contract or agreement, but the effectiveness of such decisions relies on the options we select. We should apply pressure in a manner that does not result in a breakdown of relationships. Even when adopting a forceful approach, the intention should be to achieve project or business goals, not to ruin the other party. In Operation Sindoor, as stated by Indian military officials, slow missiles with restricted explosives were deployed to specifically target terrorist infrastructure while minimizing collateral damages.

PRECISE: "Hit where it hurts most." If we choose to pursue a forceful conflict resolution, it implies we will be using power, pressure, or punishment against the opposing party. During this process, we should aim to limit and localize the conflict. Whether dealing with a contractor, customer, or business partner, we must work to confine the issues to those directly related to the conflict. Clauses such as severability can aid in this. A conflict arising from one issue should not impede the ex*****on of other parts of the contract. Likewise, issues in one project or business should not disrupt relationships in other projects or deals. In Operation Sindoor, the selection of targets and timing was carried out with great care and precision. Particular building within the selected campus was targeted to maximize damage to the terrorists while minimizing the risk of collateral harm.

RESPONSIBLE In a corporate setting, numerous stakeholders may advocate for forceful conflict resolution. This may be due to the pressure to meet their own KPIs or a limited understanding of the broader picture. Additionally, it is often observed that these individuals do not take accountability for the consequences. Resorting to forceful conflict resolution should be a last resort only after all other options have been exhausted. In making this decision, all potential escalation and consequences must be carefully assessed. After evaluating all aspects, an informed and responsible decision shall be taken while preparing for all escalation and consequences. The decision regarding Operation Sindoor was made after thorough consideration of the escalation ladder, and precautionary measures such as mock drills and the activation of air defence systems were implemented beforehand to manage potential consequences.

NON-ESCALATORY: Even when circumstances force us to engage in forceful conflict resolution, every effort should be made to contain it at the lowest possible level. Conflict should not be exaggerated. We should strive to prevent it from escalating unnecessarily. A primary reason conflicts tend to escalate is personal ego; we must recognize this and strive to eliminate it to keep the conflict non-escalatory. In Operation Sindoor, as per the Government of India, war was never intended, which is why the DGMO of India promptly accepted the cease-fire proposal from the DGMO of Pakistan. Engaging in the war would have disrupted the country’s economic development; similarly, entering litigation would consume considerable time, effort, and money, adversely affecting the project, business or organization derailing the actual objectives.

I would like to once again thank Sri Vikram Misri for sharing these powerful words, which will undoubtedly assist professionals like us in resolving conflicts in our daily work.

Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India Project Management Institute of Global Peace and Conflict Management Narendra Modi

18/05/2025

Indraprastha … The Capital of India
PMO India,Narendra Modi Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India

01/05/2025