nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: Connect With Your Strengths--Linda Dessau
Connect With Your Strengths - By Linda Dessau,
We can be just as afraid of our strengths as we are of our weaknesses, and just as afraid to succeed as we are to fail. In her book, A Return to Love, in a passage that was made famous by Nelson Mandela in his 1994 Inauguration Speech, Marianne Williamson writes:
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure about you. We were born to manifest the glory of God that is within us.
It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others."
Connecting with your strengths is about learning how to acknowledge your own gifts, accept compliments graciously and to present yourself confidently as the extraordinarily unique artist that you are. I've addressed accepting compliments graciously in a separate article, so we'll examine the other two skills here.
1. Acknowledge your own gifts
Ask other people what they love about you. Create a booklet of these "testimonials". Then, make a list of everything that’s wonderful about you and/or your creative work – the different roles you hold in life, your accomplishments, the failures you’ve learned from and survived, the losses you’ve endured, the gifts you were born with, the skills you’ve developed and the knowledge you’ve gained.
Read these lists every day and really take them in. It might seem like you're talking about someone else sometimes – focus and bring your attention back to the purpose of the exercise. Talk back to your inner critic and show him the evidence! For a more powerful experience, read these lists of your strengths out loud, beginning with the words, "I am ____".
2. Present yourself confidently as the extraordinarily unique artist that you are
Remember those lists that you made earlier to acknowledge your strengths? Well, did you know that you are the one and only person who has ever and will ever walk this earth that has that unique combination of skills, experiences, knowledge, creative gifts and perspective?
Say it with me: I am the one and only person who has ever and will ever walk this earth that has my unique combination of skills, experiences, knowledge, creative gifts and perspective.
Know that. Feel that. Believe that down to your core. It's virtually impossible to doubt yourself or to compare yourself unfavorably to other artists when you're truly acknowledging and believing in your uniqueness.
There's a well-used phrase that advises, "Fake it till you make it". How would you act if you DID feel confident? Who's another artist that you think of as confident, and how do they present themselves? Use them as a role model and imagine how they would handle the situation that you're in – what would they do or say? How would they act?
Remember that another artist who seems so confident sometimes has exactly the same worries and doubts that you do.
Another way to gain confidence is through daily efficient action. This is a concept first introduced to me in The Science of Getting Rich (download your free copy at: http://www.scienceofgettingrich.net/gifts/everyday_artist.html), which I wrote about in my article, "Is there a science of creative success?" ( http://www.genuinecoaching.com/articles/science-creative-success.html).
Approach each separate thing you do today with purpose and focus. Do your best, and finish each job one at a time. It's amazing how great it feels at the end of the day, to recognize that whatever you accomplished (and it's not the number of things that matters), you truly gave it your best and completed the actions successfully.
In her book, "Take Back Your Life!" productivity coach Sally McGhee points out that nothing makes us feel better about ourselves than doing what we said we'd do. And nothing makes us feel worse about ourselves than NOT doing what we said we'd do.
The most important component of connecting with your strengths is your willingness to BE strong. Be willing to succeed. Be willing to master something. Be willing to finish what you start. Be willing to become the best person you can be. And then celebrate.
Connect With Your Strengths - By Linda Dessau,
We can be just as afraid of our strengths as we are of our weaknesses, and just as afraid to succeed as we are to fail. In her book, A Return to Love, in a passage that was made famous by Nelson Mandela in his 1994 Inauguration Speech, Marianne Williamson writes:
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure about you. We were born to manifest the glory of God that is within us.
It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others."
Connecting with your strengths is about learning how to acknowledge your own gifts, accept compliments graciously and to present yourself confidently as the extraordinarily unique artist that you are. I've addressed accepting compliments graciously in a separate article, so we'll examine the other two skills here.
1. Acknowledge your own gifts
Ask other people what they love about you. Create a booklet of these "testimonials". Then, make a list of everything that’s wonderful about you and/or your creative work – the different roles you hold in life, your accomplishments, the failures you’ve learned from and survived, the losses you’ve endured, the gifts you were born with, the skills you’ve developed and the knowledge you’ve gained.
Read these lists every day and really take them in. It might seem like you're talking about someone else sometimes – focus and bring your attention back to the purpose of the exercise. Talk back to your inner critic and show him the evidence! For a more powerful experience, read these lists of your strengths out loud, beginning with the words, "I am ____".
2. Present yourself confidently as the extraordinarily unique artist that you are
Remember those lists that you made earlier to acknowledge your strengths? Well, did you know that you are the one and only person who has ever and will ever walk this earth that has that unique combination of skills, experiences, knowledge, creative gifts and perspective?
Say it with me: I am the one and only person who has ever and will ever walk this earth that has my unique combination of skills, experiences, knowledge, creative gifts and perspective.
Know that. Feel that. Believe that down to your core. It's virtually impossible to doubt yourself or to compare yourself unfavorably to other artists when you're truly acknowledging and believing in your uniqueness.
There's a well-used phrase that advises, "Fake it till you make it". How would you act if you DID feel confident? Who's another artist that you think of as confident, and how do they present themselves? Use them as a role model and imagine how they would handle the situation that you're in – what would they do or say? How would they act?
Remember that another artist who seems so confident sometimes has exactly the same worries and doubts that you do.
Another way to gain confidence is through daily efficient action. This is a concept first introduced to me in The Science of Getting Rich (download your free copy at: http://www.scienceofgettingrich.net/gifts/everyday_artist.html), which I wrote about in my article, "Is there a science of creative success?" ( http://www.genuinecoaching.com/articles/science-creative-success.html).
Approach each separate thing you do today with purpose and focus. Do your best, and finish each job one at a time. It's amazing how great it feels at the end of the day, to recognize that whatever you accomplished (and it's not the number of things that matters), you truly gave it your best and completed the actions successfully.
In her book, "Take Back Your Life!" productivity coach Sally McGhee points out that nothing makes us feel better about ourselves than doing what we said we'd do. And nothing makes us feel worse about ourselves than NOT doing what we said we'd do.
The most important component of connecting with your strengths is your willingness to BE strong. Be willing to succeed. Be willing to master something. Be willing to finish what you start. Be willing to become the best person you can be. And then celebrate.
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: Womens Special - Global Power 50
Global Power 50
From France to India to Mexico, there is a world of opportunity out there--and these 50 women have seized it. We have a Indian who has mad us all proud
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune
November 14, 2005
(FORTUNE Magazine) –
1 ANNE LAUVERGEON, Chairman • Areva • France • 2004 rank: 1
Business is good at Areva, the world's largest nuclear technology company. Lauvergeon, 46, snagged several deals in China and hopes to build the first new commercial reactor in the U.S. in 27 years. Revenues rose 48%, to $13.8 billion. She is also a director at Vodafone, the world's fourth-largest telecom
2 XIE QIHUA, Chairman • Shanghai Baosteel Group • China • 2004 rank: 2
Xie, 62, stepped down as president of the world's sixth-largest steelmaker because of mandatory retirement. But the "Iron Lady" is still chairman of the $19.5 billion company--and very much in charge. Under Xie's leadership, Baosteel has expanded abroad and is poised for an IPO.
3 MARJORIE SCARDINO, CEO • Pearson • Britain • 2004 rank: 3
Despite a stagnant stock, Scardino, 58, seems firmly ensconced at this publishing and education company--it owns the Financial Times and Penguin. A poor year in the book group aside, overall revenue stayed steady at $7.2 billion.
4 LINDA COOK, Executive Director, Gas and Power • Royal Dutch/Shell • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 7
As one of five members of Shell's executive committee, Cook, 47, is the highest-ranked woman at the world's third-largest oil company. Her division delivered $2.2 billion in earnings on $9.6 billion in revenue.
5 TOMOYO NONAKA, Chairman and CEO • Sanyo Electric • Japan • 2004 rank: New
The 51-year-old Nonaka is one of two women appointed to head a FORTUNE Global 500 company in Japan this year. There has been public speculation that the former TV anchorwoman is not really in charge, but no one doubts that Sanyo needs leadership. The struggling $23 billion electronics giant lost $1.6 billion last fiscal year. Nonaka's restructuring plans including eliminating 10,000 jobs and leaving the DVD, semiconductor, and VCR businesses.
6 MARINA BERLUSCONI, Chairman • Fininvest • Italy • 2004 rank: 9
Promoted to chairman in October, Berlusconi, 39, solidified her power at the family's business empire, which controls large swaths of Italy's media. The $7 billion group has interests in publishing, the Internet, movies, and radio, as well as Mediaset, Italy's largest private broadcaster. Fininvest had its best year ever in 2004; operating earnings were up 30%, to more than $1 billion. It can't hurt that her father, Silvio Berlusconi, is Prime Minister of Italy.
7 NANCY MCKINSTRY, Chairman and CEO • Wolters Kluwer • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 4
In her two years at the top of this $4 billion Dutch publishing and online services company, McKinstry, 46, has radically changed its culture. Once a loosely run holding company that grew by acquisition, Wolters Kluwer is now operating as a coherent whole. McKinstry's cost cutting is on track, as is her plan to get 4% growth by developing products and services organically.
8 ANA BOTIN, Executive Chairman • Banco Banesto • Spain • 2004 rank: 6
Botín, 44, is being groomed to take over the family-run Banco Santander, but for now she's preoccupied with reviving Banco Banesto. This year she's likely to meet her target of increasing the top line by 20%.
9 MARY MA, Chief Financial Officer • Lenovo • China • 2004 rank: 14
Ma was an architect of Lenovo's acquisition of IBM's PC business last year. The deal puts the computer manufacturer in third place in the industry, behind only Dell and Hewlett-Packard, with expected revenue this year of $13 billion.
10 FUMIKO HAYASHI, Chairman and CEO • Daiei • Japan • 2004 rank: New
Hayashi, 59, has spent much of her career selling cars, most recently as president of BMW Tokyo. Now her job is to get Daiei into gear. The supermarket chain lost $4.5 billion last year on sales of $16 billion.
11 HO CHING, CEO • Temasek Holdings • Singapore • 2004 rank: 5
Ho oversees Temasek, the state-owned investment house with a $100 billion portfolio. She is also half of Singapore's First Couple; her husband is the Prime Minister.
12 VIVIENNE COX, CEO • Gas, Power, and Renewables • BP • Britain • 2004 rank: 15
The highest-ranking woman at the world's second-largest corporation, Cox increased profits by 65% in 2004.
13 ROSE MARIE BRAVO, CEO • Burberry • Britain • 2004 rank: 13
Bravo, Bravo! After eight years of pushing plaid, she has boosted gross profit margins to an astonishing 59%.
14 MARÍA ARAMBURUZABALA DE GARZA, Vice Chairman • Grupo Modelo • Mexico • 2004 rank: 11
She is perhaps the most powerful businesswoman in Latin America; her company controls 60% of the Mexican beer market.
15 YANG MIANMIAN, President • Haier Group • China • 2004 rank: 8
Yang, 64, has pushed the appliance-maker into international markets.
16 VAL GOODING, CEO • Bupa • Britain • 2004 rank: 18
Since 1998, Gooding, 55, has boosted sales at this health-services company by 89%, to $7 billion.
17 GÜLER SABANCI, Chairman and Managing Director • Sabanci Holdings • Turkey • 2004 rank: 20
Her $8.6 billion family-owned conglomerate is the second-largest in Turkey.
18 PATRICIA BARBIZET, CEO • Artémis Holding • France • 2004 rank: 16
Barbizet heads this investment group for French conglomerateur François Pinault and is also the vice chairman of PPR, a $30 billion retail empire.
19 CLARA FURSE, CEO • London Stock Exchange • Britain • 2004 rank: 17
Furse has rebuffed several suitors, keeping the venerable exchange independent.
20 KATE SWANN, CEO • W.H. Smith • Britain • 2004 rank: 10
The $4.4 billion book, CD, and magazine retailer swung from a loss in 2004 to a pretax profit of $145 million for the year ended Aug. 31.
21 MARIE EHRLING, President • TeliaSonera • Sweden • 2004 rank: 21
Ehrling is responsible for half of the company's $12.4 billion in revenue and two-thirds of its $2 billion in profit.
22 LIEN SIAOU-SZE, Senior Vice President • Hewlett-Packard • Singapore • 2004 rank: 19
Lien manages 15,000 employees in 13 countries and was responsible for about $12 billion of Hewlett-Packard's revenue last year.
23 IMRE BARMANBEK, Deputy Chairman • Dogan Holding • Turkey • 2004 rank: 22
The No. 2 exec at this $5.7 billion conglomerate, Barmanbek, 63, took it into the energy business.
24 BARBARA KUX, Chief Procurement Officer • Philips • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 26
With $22 billion to spend, Kux has a lot of shopping to do. She has cut the number of suppliers by a third and eliminated inefficiencies.
25 DOMINIQUE REINICHE, President, COO, EU Group • Coca-Cola • France • 2004 rank: 39
Newly promoted to lead this $7 billion division, Reiniche needs to put some pop into the German market.
26 BARBARA DALIBARD, Executive Vice President • France Telecom • France • 2004 rank: 27
27 ANN GODBEHERE, Chief Financial Officer• Swiss Re • Switzerland • 2004 rank: 28
28 MARIA RAMOS, CEO • Transnet • South Africa • 2004 rank: 29
29 THERESA GATTUNG, CEO • Telecom New Zealand • New Zealand • 2004 rank: 32
30 DOMINIQUE HÉRIARD DUBREUIL, Chairman • Rémy Cointreau • France • 2004 rank: 24
31 SAWAKO NOMA, President and CEO • Kodansha • Japan • 2004 rank: 31
32 GALIA MAOR, President and CEO • Leumi Group • Israel • 2004 rank: 36
33 SLY BAILEY, CEO • Trinity Mirror • Britain • 2004 rank: 23
34 BARBARA STYMIEST, Chief Operating Officer • Royal Bank of Canada • Canada • 2004 rank: New
35 LUBNA OLAYAN, CEO • Olayan Financing • Saudi Arabia • 2004 rank: 37
36 FRANÇOISE GRI, CEO • IBM France • France • 2004 rank: 33
37 DAWN ROBERTSON, CEO • Myer • Australia • 2004 rank: 30
38 YOSHIKO SHINOHARA, President • Tempstaff • Japan • 2004 rank: 34
39 PANSY HO, Managing Director • Shun Tak Holdings • Hong Kong • 2004 rank: 49
40 MARIE-CHRISTINE CAUBET, Senior Vice President • Renault • France • 2004 rank: New
41 MARJORIE YANG, Chairman and CEO • Esquel Group • Hong Kong • 2004 rank: 44
42 OFRA STRAUSS-LAHAT, Chairman • Strauss-Elite Group • Israel • 2004 rank: 45
43 AMELIA FAWCETT, Vice Chairman • Morgan Stanley International • Britain • 2004 rank: 40
44 KIRAN MAZUMDAR-SHAW Chairman and Managing Director • Biocon • India • 2004 rank: New
45 WANDA RAPACZYNSKI, President • Agora • Poland • 2004 rank: 48
46 TERESITA SY-COSON, Vice Chairman • SM Investments • Philippines • 2004 rank: 47
47 CHANDA KOCHHAR, Executive Director • ICICI Bank • India • 2004 rank: New
48 DONG MINGZHU, General Manager • Gree Electric Appliances • China • 2004 rank: 42
49 VIDYA CHHABRIA, Chairman, • Jumbo Group • Dubai • 2004 rank: 38
50 CHUA SOCK KOONG, Chief Financial Officer • Singapore Telecommunications • Singapore • 2004 rank: 43
Hope you all have enjoyed this piece of information.
Global Power 50
From France to India to Mexico, there is a world of opportunity out there--and these 50 women have seized it. We have a Indian who has mad us all proud
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune
November 14, 2005
(FORTUNE Magazine) –
1 ANNE LAUVERGEON, Chairman • Areva • France • 2004 rank: 1
Business is good at Areva, the world's largest nuclear technology company. Lauvergeon, 46, snagged several deals in China and hopes to build the first new commercial reactor in the U.S. in 27 years. Revenues rose 48%, to $13.8 billion. She is also a director at Vodafone, the world's fourth-largest telecom
2 XIE QIHUA, Chairman • Shanghai Baosteel Group • China • 2004 rank: 2
Xie, 62, stepped down as president of the world's sixth-largest steelmaker because of mandatory retirement. But the "Iron Lady" is still chairman of the $19.5 billion company--and very much in charge. Under Xie's leadership, Baosteel has expanded abroad and is poised for an IPO.
3 MARJORIE SCARDINO, CEO • Pearson • Britain • 2004 rank: 3
Despite a stagnant stock, Scardino, 58, seems firmly ensconced at this publishing and education company--it owns the Financial Times and Penguin. A poor year in the book group aside, overall revenue stayed steady at $7.2 billion.
4 LINDA COOK, Executive Director, Gas and Power • Royal Dutch/Shell • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 7
As one of five members of Shell's executive committee, Cook, 47, is the highest-ranked woman at the world's third-largest oil company. Her division delivered $2.2 billion in earnings on $9.6 billion in revenue.
5 TOMOYO NONAKA, Chairman and CEO • Sanyo Electric • Japan • 2004 rank: New
The 51-year-old Nonaka is one of two women appointed to head a FORTUNE Global 500 company in Japan this year. There has been public speculation that the former TV anchorwoman is not really in charge, but no one doubts that Sanyo needs leadership. The struggling $23 billion electronics giant lost $1.6 billion last fiscal year. Nonaka's restructuring plans including eliminating 10,000 jobs and leaving the DVD, semiconductor, and VCR businesses.
6 MARINA BERLUSCONI, Chairman • Fininvest • Italy • 2004 rank: 9
Promoted to chairman in October, Berlusconi, 39, solidified her power at the family's business empire, which controls large swaths of Italy's media. The $7 billion group has interests in publishing, the Internet, movies, and radio, as well as Mediaset, Italy's largest private broadcaster. Fininvest had its best year ever in 2004; operating earnings were up 30%, to more than $1 billion. It can't hurt that her father, Silvio Berlusconi, is Prime Minister of Italy.
7 NANCY MCKINSTRY, Chairman and CEO • Wolters Kluwer • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 4
In her two years at the top of this $4 billion Dutch publishing and online services company, McKinstry, 46, has radically changed its culture. Once a loosely run holding company that grew by acquisition, Wolters Kluwer is now operating as a coherent whole. McKinstry's cost cutting is on track, as is her plan to get 4% growth by developing products and services organically.
8 ANA BOTIN, Executive Chairman • Banco Banesto • Spain • 2004 rank: 6
Botín, 44, is being groomed to take over the family-run Banco Santander, but for now she's preoccupied with reviving Banco Banesto. This year she's likely to meet her target of increasing the top line by 20%.
9 MARY MA, Chief Financial Officer • Lenovo • China • 2004 rank: 14
Ma was an architect of Lenovo's acquisition of IBM's PC business last year. The deal puts the computer manufacturer in third place in the industry, behind only Dell and Hewlett-Packard, with expected revenue this year of $13 billion.
10 FUMIKO HAYASHI, Chairman and CEO • Daiei • Japan • 2004 rank: New
Hayashi, 59, has spent much of her career selling cars, most recently as president of BMW Tokyo. Now her job is to get Daiei into gear. The supermarket chain lost $4.5 billion last year on sales of $16 billion.
11 HO CHING, CEO • Temasek Holdings • Singapore • 2004 rank: 5
Ho oversees Temasek, the state-owned investment house with a $100 billion portfolio. She is also half of Singapore's First Couple; her husband is the Prime Minister.
12 VIVIENNE COX, CEO • Gas, Power, and Renewables • BP • Britain • 2004 rank: 15
The highest-ranking woman at the world's second-largest corporation, Cox increased profits by 65% in 2004.
13 ROSE MARIE BRAVO, CEO • Burberry • Britain • 2004 rank: 13
Bravo, Bravo! After eight years of pushing plaid, she has boosted gross profit margins to an astonishing 59%.
14 MARÍA ARAMBURUZABALA DE GARZA, Vice Chairman • Grupo Modelo • Mexico • 2004 rank: 11
She is perhaps the most powerful businesswoman in Latin America; her company controls 60% of the Mexican beer market.
15 YANG MIANMIAN, President • Haier Group • China • 2004 rank: 8
Yang, 64, has pushed the appliance-maker into international markets.
16 VAL GOODING, CEO • Bupa • Britain • 2004 rank: 18
Since 1998, Gooding, 55, has boosted sales at this health-services company by 89%, to $7 billion.
17 GÜLER SABANCI, Chairman and Managing Director • Sabanci Holdings • Turkey • 2004 rank: 20
Her $8.6 billion family-owned conglomerate is the second-largest in Turkey.
18 PATRICIA BARBIZET, CEO • Artémis Holding • France • 2004 rank: 16
Barbizet heads this investment group for French conglomerateur François Pinault and is also the vice chairman of PPR, a $30 billion retail empire.
19 CLARA FURSE, CEO • London Stock Exchange • Britain • 2004 rank: 17
Furse has rebuffed several suitors, keeping the venerable exchange independent.
20 KATE SWANN, CEO • W.H. Smith • Britain • 2004 rank: 10
The $4.4 billion book, CD, and magazine retailer swung from a loss in 2004 to a pretax profit of $145 million for the year ended Aug. 31.
21 MARIE EHRLING, President • TeliaSonera • Sweden • 2004 rank: 21
Ehrling is responsible for half of the company's $12.4 billion in revenue and two-thirds of its $2 billion in profit.
22 LIEN SIAOU-SZE, Senior Vice President • Hewlett-Packard • Singapore • 2004 rank: 19
Lien manages 15,000 employees in 13 countries and was responsible for about $12 billion of Hewlett-Packard's revenue last year.
23 IMRE BARMANBEK, Deputy Chairman • Dogan Holding • Turkey • 2004 rank: 22
The No. 2 exec at this $5.7 billion conglomerate, Barmanbek, 63, took it into the energy business.
24 BARBARA KUX, Chief Procurement Officer • Philips • The Netherlands • 2004 rank: 26
With $22 billion to spend, Kux has a lot of shopping to do. She has cut the number of suppliers by a third and eliminated inefficiencies.
25 DOMINIQUE REINICHE, President, COO, EU Group • Coca-Cola • France • 2004 rank: 39
Newly promoted to lead this $7 billion division, Reiniche needs to put some pop into the German market.
26 BARBARA DALIBARD, Executive Vice President • France Telecom • France • 2004 rank: 27
27 ANN GODBEHERE, Chief Financial Officer• Swiss Re • Switzerland • 2004 rank: 28
28 MARIA RAMOS, CEO • Transnet • South Africa • 2004 rank: 29
29 THERESA GATTUNG, CEO • Telecom New Zealand • New Zealand • 2004 rank: 32
30 DOMINIQUE HÉRIARD DUBREUIL, Chairman • Rémy Cointreau • France • 2004 rank: 24
31 SAWAKO NOMA, President and CEO • Kodansha • Japan • 2004 rank: 31
32 GALIA MAOR, President and CEO • Leumi Group • Israel • 2004 rank: 36
33 SLY BAILEY, CEO • Trinity Mirror • Britain • 2004 rank: 23
34 BARBARA STYMIEST, Chief Operating Officer • Royal Bank of Canada • Canada • 2004 rank: New
35 LUBNA OLAYAN, CEO • Olayan Financing • Saudi Arabia • 2004 rank: 37
36 FRANÇOISE GRI, CEO • IBM France • France • 2004 rank: 33
37 DAWN ROBERTSON, CEO • Myer • Australia • 2004 rank: 30
38 YOSHIKO SHINOHARA, President • Tempstaff • Japan • 2004 rank: 34
39 PANSY HO, Managing Director • Shun Tak Holdings • Hong Kong • 2004 rank: 49
40 MARIE-CHRISTINE CAUBET, Senior Vice President • Renault • France • 2004 rank: New
41 MARJORIE YANG, Chairman and CEO • Esquel Group • Hong Kong • 2004 rank: 44
42 OFRA STRAUSS-LAHAT, Chairman • Strauss-Elite Group • Israel • 2004 rank: 45
43 AMELIA FAWCETT, Vice Chairman • Morgan Stanley International • Britain • 2004 rank: 40
44 KIRAN MAZUMDAR-SHAW Chairman and Managing Director • Biocon • India • 2004 rank: New
45 WANDA RAPACZYNSKI, President • Agora • Poland • 2004 rank: 48
46 TERESITA SY-COSON, Vice Chairman • SM Investments • Philippines • 2004 rank: 47
47 CHANDA KOCHHAR, Executive Director • ICICI Bank • India • 2004 rank: New
48 DONG MINGZHU, General Manager • Gree Electric Appliances • China • 2004 rank: 42
49 VIDYA CHHABRIA, Chairman, • Jumbo Group • Dubai • 2004 rank: 38
50 CHUA SOCK KOONG, Chief Financial Officer • Singapore Telecommunications • Singapore • 2004 rank: 43
Hope you all have enjoyed this piece of information.
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: Life is not a race, but a journey to be savoured each step of the way
Imagine life as a game in which you are juggling some five balls in the air. You name them - work, family, health, friends and spirit and you're keeping all of these in the air. You will soon understand that work is a rubber ball. If you drop it, it will bounce back. But the other four balls family, health, friends and spirit - are made of glass.
If you drop one of these, they will be irrevocably scuffed, marked, nicked, damaged or even shattered. They will never be the same.
You must understand that and strive for balance in your life." …… H O W?
1. Don't undermine your worth by comparing yourself with others. It is because we are different that each of us is special.
2. Don't set your goals by what other people deem important. Only you know what is best for you.
3. Don't take for granted the things closest to your heart. Cling to them as you would to your life, for without them, life is meaningless.
4. Don't let your life slip through your fingers by living in the past or for the future. By living your life one day at a time, you live all the days of your life.
5. Don't give up when you still have something to give. Nothing is really over until the moment you stop trying.
6. Don't be afraid to admit that you are less than perfect. It is this fragile thread that binds us to each other, together.
7. Don't be afraid to encounter risks. It is by taking chances that we learn how to be brave.
8. Don't shut love out of your life by saying it's impossible to find time. The quickest way to receive love is to give; the fastest way to lose love is to hold it too tightly; and the best way to keep love is to
give it wings.
9. Don't run through life so fast that you forget not only where you've been, but also where you are going.
10. Don't forget, a person's greatest emotional need is to feel appreciated.
11. Don't be afraid to learn. Knowledge is weightless, a treasure you can always carry easily.
12. Don't use time or words carelessly. Neither can be retrieved.
Life is not a race, but a journey to be savoured each step of the way.
LIFE
Imagine life as a game in which you are juggling some five balls in the air. You name them - work, family, health, friends and spirit and you're keeping all of these in the air. You will soon understand that work is a rubber ball. If you drop it, it will bounce back. But the other four balls family, health, friends and spirit - are made of glass.
If you drop one of these, they will be irrevocably scuffed, marked, nicked, damaged or even shattered. They will never be the same.
You must understand that and strive for balance in your life." …… H O W?
1. Don't undermine your worth by comparing yourself with others. It is because we are different that each of us is special.
2. Don't set your goals by what other people deem important. Only you know what is best for you.
3. Don't take for granted the things closest to your heart. Cling to them as you would to your life, for without them, life is meaningless.
4. Don't let your life slip through your fingers by living in the past or for the future. By living your life one day at a time, you live all the days of your life.
5. Don't give up when you still have something to give. Nothing is really over until the moment you stop trying.
6. Don't be afraid to admit that you are less than perfect. It is this fragile thread that binds us to each other, together.
7. Don't be afraid to encounter risks. It is by taking chances that we learn how to be brave.
8. Don't shut love out of your life by saying it's impossible to find time. The quickest way to receive love is to give; the fastest way to lose love is to hold it too tightly; and the best way to keep love is to
give it wings.
9. Don't run through life so fast that you forget not only where you've been, but also where you are going.
10. Don't forget, a person's greatest emotional need is to feel appreciated.
11. Don't be afraid to learn. Knowledge is weightless, a treasure you can always carry easily.
12. Don't use time or words carelessly. Neither can be retrieved.
Life is not a race, but a journey to be savoured each step of the way.
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space : To Get Ahead, Use Your Head
Consider the story of two lumberjacks in a tree-cutting contest.
Both were strong and determined, hoping to win the prize. But one was hardworking and ambitious, chopping down every tree in his path at the fastest pace possible, while the other appeared to be a little more laid back, methodically felling trees and pacing himself. The go-getter worked all day, skipping his lunch break, expecting that his superior effort would be rewarded. His opponent, however, took an hour-long lunch, then resumed his steady pace. In the end, the eager beaver was dismayed to lose to his "lazier" competition.Thinking he deserved to win after his hard work, he finally approached his opponent and said, "I just don't understand. I worked longer and harder than you, and went hungry to get ahead. You took a break, and yet you still won. It just doesn't seem fair. Where did I go wrong?" The winner responded, "While I was taking my lunch break, I was sharpening my axe."
Hard work will always pay off; smart work will pay better. Remember back in college, there were the kids who studied all day and all night, but still struggled to pass exams? Then there were the kids who studied hard but also found time for a game of cards or basketball, and still aced every test. Both groups studied the same material, attended the same lectures taught by the same professors, and took the same test. Was the second group just that much more brilliant? Maybe, but my money's on the way they approached their material and learned how to study. If they were smart, they applied those same principles after graduation: work hard, but work smart.
That's a lesson that can be learned by even young children.
A little girl visiting a watermelon farm asked the farmer how much a large watermelon cost. "Three dollars," he told her. "But I only have thirty cents," the little girl said. The farmer looked around his field, and feeling sorry for the little girl, pointed at a small watermelon and said, "That one's thirty cents." "Oh good," she replied as she paid him, "Just leave it on the vine and I'll be back in a month to get it."
Call it creativity, call it ingenuity, call it whatever: I call it using your head. Knowing how to analyze a situation and how to execute an action plan will put you ahead of the game in the long run. There's nothing wrong with having a leg up on your competition - it's how you win. The combination of hard work and smart work is the formula for success. Think about what needs to be done, and then think again about the best way to accomplish it - not necessarily the way you've always done it, or the fastest way, and certainly not the hardest way. Never make work harder than it has to be. That's just a colossal waste of time.
Perhaps the ingenuity award goes to the fellow who came to the Canadian border on his motorcycle, carrying two saddlebags strapped across his seat. The border guards asked the obvious question, "What's in your saddlebags?" "Rocks," was the reply. So the guards emptied the bags to check out his story. Sure enough, all they found were rocks. So they sent him on his way. The next week, the same fellow came to the crossing, again on a motorcycle, again with the same payload. The guards checked once again, and found more rocks. Off he went. The scene repeated itself weekly for several months, until finally the guards couldn't stand it any longer. "We know you are smuggling something across the border, but every time we inspect your saddlebags we find only rocks. Please tell us what you are up to, and we promise not to turn you in." "Well," the fellow replied, "It's really very simple. I'm smuggling stolen motorcycles."
Mackay's Moral: It's good to work hard. It's great to work smart. But it's best to work hard and smart.
To Get Ahead, Use Your Head
I'm the last person in the world who would tell you not to work hard. I'm also the first one to remind you that working hard must also be tempered by working smart, or you might just be wasting a load of effort. There is a reason why we were born with both muscles and brains.
Consider the story of two lumberjacks in a tree-cutting contest.
Both were strong and determined, hoping to win the prize. But one was hardworking and ambitious, chopping down every tree in his path at the fastest pace possible, while the other appeared to be a little more laid back, methodically felling trees and pacing himself. The go-getter worked all day, skipping his lunch break, expecting that his superior effort would be rewarded. His opponent, however, took an hour-long lunch, then resumed his steady pace. In the end, the eager beaver was dismayed to lose to his "lazier" competition.Thinking he deserved to win after his hard work, he finally approached his opponent and said, "I just don't understand. I worked longer and harder than you, and went hungry to get ahead. You took a break, and yet you still won. It just doesn't seem fair. Where did I go wrong?" The winner responded, "While I was taking my lunch break, I was sharpening my axe."
Hard work will always pay off; smart work will pay better. Remember back in college, there were the kids who studied all day and all night, but still struggled to pass exams? Then there were the kids who studied hard but also found time for a game of cards or basketball, and still aced every test. Both groups studied the same material, attended the same lectures taught by the same professors, and took the same test. Was the second group just that much more brilliant? Maybe, but my money's on the way they approached their material and learned how to study. If they were smart, they applied those same principles after graduation: work hard, but work smart.
That's a lesson that can be learned by even young children.
A little girl visiting a watermelon farm asked the farmer how much a large watermelon cost. "Three dollars," he told her. "But I only have thirty cents," the little girl said. The farmer looked around his field, and feeling sorry for the little girl, pointed at a small watermelon and said, "That one's thirty cents." "Oh good," she replied as she paid him, "Just leave it on the vine and I'll be back in a month to get it."
Call it creativity, call it ingenuity, call it whatever: I call it using your head. Knowing how to analyze a situation and how to execute an action plan will put you ahead of the game in the long run. There's nothing wrong with having a leg up on your competition - it's how you win. The combination of hard work and smart work is the formula for success. Think about what needs to be done, and then think again about the best way to accomplish it - not necessarily the way you've always done it, or the fastest way, and certainly not the hardest way. Never make work harder than it has to be. That's just a colossal waste of time.
Perhaps the ingenuity award goes to the fellow who came to the Canadian border on his motorcycle, carrying two saddlebags strapped across his seat. The border guards asked the obvious question, "What's in your saddlebags?" "Rocks," was the reply. So the guards emptied the bags to check out his story. Sure enough, all they found were rocks. So they sent him on his way. The next week, the same fellow came to the crossing, again on a motorcycle, again with the same payload. The guards checked once again, and found more rocks. Off he went. The scene repeated itself weekly for several months, until finally the guards couldn't stand it any longer. "We know you are smuggling something across the border, but every time we inspect your saddlebags we find only rocks. Please tell us what you are up to, and we promise not to turn you in." "Well," the fellow replied, "It's really very simple. I'm smuggling stolen motorcycles."
Mackay's Moral: It's good to work hard. It's great to work smart. But it's best to work hard and smart.
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: ON RECORD: Kamal Oberoi......chairman & managing director, M&C Saatchi
The man who was once at the helm of affairs of one of India’s largest advertising agencies is now equally comfortable and confident running a relatively smaller agency. Kamal Oberoi, chairman and managing director, M&C Saatchi, spent more than a decade at JWT, where he rose to the position of president in 2002. While at JWT, Oberoi worked on brands such as Pepsi, Frito-Lay, Yum! Restaurants, Nestle, Hero Honda, ESPN STAR Sports, Reckitt Benckiser, Reebok and GSK. During the course of his career, he has been involved in the successful launch of the most important product of Ford, the largest client of JWT worldwide. JWT grew its profitability by 40 per cent during Oberoi’s tenure as president and he was also instrumental in enhancing the quality of employee productivity by instituting external and internal employee skill upgrading programmes. Currently, apart from his role at M&C Saatchi, he is also director of Fortune Communications and Medvalue Holdings. Oberoi talks to Tuhina Anand of agencyfaqs! about his new role and reveals the DNA of M&C Saatchi...
Q. How has life changed for Kamal Oberoi from JWT to M&C Saatchi? How difficult is it to work for a smaller agency when you have already headed one of the country's biggest agencies?
A. JWT was a great experience. It’s a great organisation to work for. The fact that I joined as a senior accounts executive and rose to the position of president speaks volumes for the organisation in terms of the opportunities and exposure one gets there. There are no regrets at all.
But life goes on and, at some stage, one decides that one has to move on and do something that is different and more challenging. That’s what happened. Certainly, the kind of work I am doing now is different because it’s much more challenging to construct something from scratch. There’s more incentive. But that’s where the difference ends; otherwise, the profession is the same.
A. M&C Saatchi approached me. And I approached Abhinav (Dhar), with whom I had worked earlier while at JWT, even though for only a short time. We decided to work together again and, thus, three parties with similar interests came together.
Q. What was the idea behind acquiring a small creative hot shop such as Dhar & Hoon? M&C Saatchi could have acquired a much bigger agency to enter India. Is there any bigger game-plan behind this?
A. Dhar & Hoon is a great creative hot shop and has been rated as the second best creative hot shop in India by an advertising supplement. It was a perfect partnership. In a joint venture, you try to evaluate whether the chemistry and combination between partners will work. M&C Saatchi is pretty entrepreneurial in nature, therefore it all gelled and filled in with the creative spirit of Dhar & Hoon, which is also entrepreneurial in nature.
A. We are still a creative agency. We are not in the media business and we don’t intend to be there. We believe in the theory that a single agency cannot be good in every discipline. For instance, if you are good in creative, it is not necessary that you are also good in areas such as direct marketing, PR or any other discipline. For each of these sectors, you need to have a specialist and this is why one needs to be either associated or have separate outfits that are good in their own disciplines.
These days, agencies often end up paying mere lip service to the client. And if you provide lip service in certain areas in which you are not good, it will lead to a bad experience for the client and a bad impression of the agency.
As far as clients are concerned, yes, they prefer to have a one-stop shop.
There are various models that agencies have tried out. I don’t know how far they will be successful. Bigger agencies often follow a model where one person is the brand custodian and there are people from various disciplines reporting to him. He is the one point of contact for the clients. Some agencies also experiment with separate teams for different brands.
But I don’t see any one module that people are most comfortable with or have arrived at.
For us, it is important to generate ideas that are transferable and can be implemented in every medium.
Q. Internationally, there is more focus on BTL (below the line) than ATL (above the line). Do you see a similar trend emerging in India?
A. It all depends upon what is the most effective way of reaching the consumer. If BTL activities make sense for any brand, then one should go ahead with those.
Although we are just five months old, we have undertaken many BTL activities, from sampling of households to organising cookery lessons for a microwave oven brand to organising test drives for cars in residential complexes and clubs. Similarly, we have set up stalls in a mall wherein we have called people for healthcare or beauty care, we have tried Web-based activity and SMS activity on mobile phones.
So, we have undertaken a whole lot of activities. I can say that today, possibly, 20-25 per cent of our revenue comes in from such BTL initiatives. What we are exploring is non-traditional advertising – say, for a retail client, we have undertaken an entire gamut of communication at various touch points rather than just POPs or in-store advertising. For an IT client, we are getting into chats communication, which is tailor-made for that particular client.
A. I don’t think anybody in this world says that I will only pitch for this business and not pitch for this category. I am yet to meet people in advertising, who, without any solid reason, are unwilling to take on any new business. The only possible reason for an agency to not take up a business is conflict of interest.
Right now, as an agency that is trying to find its foothold, I don’t really have a choice.
Q. Being a new agency, don’t you think we should hear more news about M&C Saatchi bagging new businesses? But of late, we have only heard about VLCC. Is it a strategy to move at a slower pace?
A. It’s not a conscious move. We are just five months old, but we are getting new business. Just because we are not being written about doesn’t mean that we are not bagging any new business. We are in a growing phase and there are a whole lot of areas in which we are working to establish the agency.
After VLCC, there have been associations and we have been doing work on a project basis, but till they culminate into a long-term relationship, we would prefer not to make an announcement. I think it would be premature to make any announcements regarding them at this point of time.
A. We are not fly by the night operators. Our aim is to build long-lasting relationships with our clients. Each agency has its own strategy to provide value to existing clients while adding new clients to its list. We have earmarked responsibilities within the agency set-up, wherein there are teams who dedicatedly work on existing clients, while others have been given the responsibility to get new businesses. Running an agency is like driving a car – at times, you have to accelerate, at others, slow down and, at times, even put a brake on some activities. It all depends on the need of the hour.
Q. When you launched the agency, you had said that all of M&C Saatchi’s international clients, which have an office in India, would fall into the Indian agency's kitty. How many of these have been aligned with M&C Saatchi India till now?
A. This goes without saying. But yes, there are many non-aligned clients on an agency’s roster. Even worldwide, M&C Saatchi is still a young agency. We are just 10 years old, and that’s not an issue. The point is that the way we are structured, we have more region specific clients rather than global clients. We handle Pizza Hut in Australia, Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) out of Hong Kong. But that doesn’t mean we handle the business across the globe.
M&C Saatchi has very few global clients – we handle more region-specific businesses. We are more into local clients in the respective countries. So, currently, we don’t have any international client which has fallen into our kitty due to global re-alignment.
A. I think it’s probably one of the fastest growing agencies in the world, not just the Asia Pacific. India has great potential, the driver being its booming economy. It’s like a thumb rule. The history of advertising has proven that when an economy grows, then the advertising industry grows, too. Forecasters say this run will continue. So, the future of the advertising market per se is looking great as far as India is concerned.
Also, if you take a look at the larger networks, the contribution from India has been pretty significant, be it at the global level or in the Asia Pacific region. India is a market that cannot be ignored.
We are looking at being the most sought after agency, but we will not chase any numbers.
Q. Does that put more pressure on India to deliver, as we know that the European markets have reached saturation point?
A. In the case of large global networks, yes, there is pressure. But then that holds true for any agency or set-up. For instance, if an agency has five offices across the country, all five offices will not perform equally. Some years, one office may not do well and the pressure will automatically fall on the other offices. That’s part and parcel of life, whether you look at the organisation from a global perspective or local. If offices in Europe are not performing well, it is bound to put pressure on all other offices, especially those who have the potential to earn more.
A. The clients that we have acquired are not through any business pitches. We are doing work for them on a project basis, based on their immediate needs and requirements. On the successful culmination of these projects, we will formally get these businesses. There are around six or seven such businesses and, maybe a few months down the line, when we get these businesses, we will be ready to expand.
Q. How far does re-branding help an agency?
A. It certainly helps in focussing what their objectives are, but then there are dangers of it falling flat and remaining just a gimmick.
You have to be careful as to what your objectives are and what the need of the hour is for an individual organisation per se and, therefore, what is required to be done. It certainly helps in refocusing and some kind of rejuvenation. How much it helps shows on the deliverables of the client. All organisations come up with certain kinds of internal measures and these are internal measures to probably enhance their own productivity levels. It’s just that people exaggerate and look for deeper meanings.
A. I wouldn’t call it our tool, but it’s our philosophy and way of life and we call it Brutal Simplicity. We firmly believe that it’s easier to complicate than to simplify and that simple messages tend to stay longer. We strongly feel that we should come up with ideas that are simple, so we won’t call it a mere tool. It reflects in our work, too. If you look at our positioning, we are probably an antidote to complexity. For this, we deliver ideas that are simple and, therefore, work most effectively in the marketplace. We help our clients achieve success on the basis of this philosophy.
Q. Can you explain this with the work you have done?
A. Sure, look at the British Airways (BA) campaign. Very simply put, BA gave us the brief that our task would be to confront the belief that BA is not meant for Indians. We came up with the idea that everybody knows that Indians have arrived in the global arena and are creating news across the world. BA, with its large network, can facilitate the global Indian traveller. Thereby came the insight that the world is ready to welcome India and the idea of executing that was through the ‘Namaste’. Therefore, the tagline that the world is waiting for you.
A. The ten-year book basically contains a selection of our work which we consider to be brilliant and effective, from our 13 offices across the Asia Pacific. It really demonstrates our philosophy and you can observe the power of Brutal Simplicity in the various ways in which we have executed ideas. Other than this, we don’t follow any other tenet; we just want to be brutally simple and not complicate matters. We hope that the next book, when it comes, will have a lot more creatives from India.
May 15, 2006
New Delhi
You can write to Kamal Oberoi at
[email protected]
"M&C Saatchi is the fastest growing agency in the world."
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Kamal Oberoi,
chairman & managing director, M&C Saatchi[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Kamal Oberoi,
chairman & managing director, M&C Saatchi[/FONT]
Q. How has life changed for Kamal Oberoi from JWT to M&C Saatchi? How difficult is it to work for a smaller agency when you have already headed one of the country's biggest agencies?
A. JWT was a great experience. It’s a great organisation to work for. The fact that I joined as a senior accounts executive and rose to the position of president speaks volumes for the organisation in terms of the opportunities and exposure one gets there. There are no regrets at all.
But life goes on and, at some stage, one decides that one has to move on and do something that is different and more challenging. That’s what happened. Certainly, the kind of work I am doing now is different because it’s much more challenging to construct something from scratch. There’s more incentive. But that’s where the difference ends; otherwise, the profession is the same.
"There are no regrets about quitting JWT. Life goes on and, at some stage, one decides that one has to move on and do something that is different and more challenging."
Q. How did this tie-up between M&C Saatchi and Dhar & Hoon happen? Were you instrumental in this acquisition?
A. M&C Saatchi approached me. And I approached Abhinav (Dhar), with whom I had worked earlier while at JWT, even though for only a short time. We decided to work together again and, thus, three parties with similar interests came together.
Q. What was the idea behind acquiring a small creative hot shop such as Dhar & Hoon? M&C Saatchi could have acquired a much bigger agency to enter India. Is there any bigger game-plan behind this?
A. Dhar & Hoon is a great creative hot shop and has been rated as the second best creative hot shop in India by an advertising supplement. It was a perfect partnership. In a joint venture, you try to evaluate whether the chemistry and combination between partners will work. M&C Saatchi is pretty entrepreneurial in nature, therefore it all gelled and filled in with the creative spirit of Dhar & Hoon, which is also entrepreneurial in nature.
"M&C Saatchi is pretty entrepreneurial in nature, therefore it all gelled and filled in with the creative spirit of Dhar & Hoon, which is also entrepreneurial in nature."
Q. Do you think it’s a survival technique for an agency to be equipped as a full-service agency? After all, even Dhar & Hoon gave up its ‘creative only’ tag to become a full service agency.
A. We are still a creative agency. We are not in the media business and we don’t intend to be there. We believe in the theory that a single agency cannot be good in every discipline. For instance, if you are good in creative, it is not necessary that you are also good in areas such as direct marketing, PR or any other discipline. For each of these sectors, you need to have a specialist and this is why one needs to be either associated or have separate outfits that are good in their own disciplines.
These days, agencies often end up paying mere lip service to the client. And if you provide lip service in certain areas in which you are not good, it will lead to a bad experience for the client and a bad impression of the agency.
As far as clients are concerned, yes, they prefer to have a one-stop shop.
There are various models that agencies have tried out. I don’t know how far they will be successful. Bigger agencies often follow a model where one person is the brand custodian and there are people from various disciplines reporting to him. He is the one point of contact for the clients. Some agencies also experiment with separate teams for different brands.
But I don’t see any one module that people are most comfortable with or have arrived at.
For us, it is important to generate ideas that are transferable and can be implemented in every medium.
Q. Internationally, there is more focus on BTL (below the line) than ATL (above the line). Do you see a similar trend emerging in India?
A. It all depends upon what is the most effective way of reaching the consumer. If BTL activities make sense for any brand, then one should go ahead with those.
Although we are just five months old, we have undertaken many BTL activities, from sampling of households to organising cookery lessons for a microwave oven brand to organising test drives for cars in residential complexes and clubs. Similarly, we have set up stalls in a mall wherein we have called people for healthcare or beauty care, we have tried Web-based activity and SMS activity on mobile phones.
So, we have undertaken a whole lot of activities. I can say that today, possibly, 20-25 per cent of our revenue comes in from such BTL initiatives. What we are exploring is non-traditional advertising – say, for a retail client, we have undertaken an entire gamut of communication at various touch points rather than just POPs or in-store advertising. For an IT client, we are getting into chats communication, which is tailor-made for that particular client.
"If you are good in creative, it is not necessary that you are also good in areas such as direct marketing, PR or any other discipline."
Q. It is important for a new agency which is finding its foothold in the industry to pitch for new business, but it is also known that indiscriminate pitching does not lead to growth. What is your stance on this as a growing agency?
A. I don’t think anybody in this world says that I will only pitch for this business and not pitch for this category. I am yet to meet people in advertising, who, without any solid reason, are unwilling to take on any new business. The only possible reason for an agency to not take up a business is conflict of interest.
Right now, as an agency that is trying to find its foothold, I don’t really have a choice.
Q. Being a new agency, don’t you think we should hear more news about M&C Saatchi bagging new businesses? But of late, we have only heard about VLCC. Is it a strategy to move at a slower pace?
A. It’s not a conscious move. We are just five months old, but we are getting new business. Just because we are not being written about doesn’t mean that we are not bagging any new business. We are in a growing phase and there are a whole lot of areas in which we are working to establish the agency.
After VLCC, there have been associations and we have been doing work on a project basis, but till they culminate into a long-term relationship, we would prefer not to make an announcement. I think it would be premature to make any announcements regarding them at this point of time.
"There are various models that agencies have tried out. I don’t know how far they will be successful."
Q. How does the agency maintain a balance between existing clients and new business?
A. We are not fly by the night operators. Our aim is to build long-lasting relationships with our clients. Each agency has its own strategy to provide value to existing clients while adding new clients to its list. We have earmarked responsibilities within the agency set-up, wherein there are teams who dedicatedly work on existing clients, while others have been given the responsibility to get new businesses. Running an agency is like driving a car – at times, you have to accelerate, at others, slow down and, at times, even put a brake on some activities. It all depends on the need of the hour.
Q. When you launched the agency, you had said that all of M&C Saatchi’s international clients, which have an office in India, would fall into the Indian agency's kitty. How many of these have been aligned with M&C Saatchi India till now?
A. This goes without saying. But yes, there are many non-aligned clients on an agency’s roster. Even worldwide, M&C Saatchi is still a young agency. We are just 10 years old, and that’s not an issue. The point is that the way we are structured, we have more region specific clients rather than global clients. We handle Pizza Hut in Australia, Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) out of Hong Kong. But that doesn’t mean we handle the business across the globe.
M&C Saatchi has very few global clients – we handle more region-specific businesses. We are more into local clients in the respective countries. So, currently, we don’t have any international client which has fallen into our kitty due to global re-alignment.
"For us, it is important to generate ideas that are transferable and can be implemented in every medium."
Q. M&C Saatchi is seen as the fastest growing agency in the Asia Pacific with 12 offices in just 10 years. How do you see it growing in India? How long will it take to be among the top 10 agencies of the country both in terms of revenue as well as creatives?
A. I think it’s probably one of the fastest growing agencies in the world, not just the Asia Pacific. India has great potential, the driver being its booming economy. It’s like a thumb rule. The history of advertising has proven that when an economy grows, then the advertising industry grows, too. Forecasters say this run will continue. So, the future of the advertising market per se is looking great as far as India is concerned.
Also, if you take a look at the larger networks, the contribution from India has been pretty significant, be it at the global level or in the Asia Pacific region. India is a market that cannot be ignored.
We are looking at being the most sought after agency, but we will not chase any numbers.
Q. Does that put more pressure on India to deliver, as we know that the European markets have reached saturation point?
A. In the case of large global networks, yes, there is pressure. But then that holds true for any agency or set-up. For instance, if an agency has five offices across the country, all five offices will not perform equally. Some years, one office may not do well and the pressure will automatically fall on the other offices. That’s part and parcel of life, whether you look at the organisation from a global perspective or local. If offices in Europe are not performing well, it is bound to put pressure on all other offices, especially those who have the potential to earn more.
"Around 20-25 per cent of M&C Saatchi’s revenues come
from BTL initiatives."
Q. You have said that M&C Saatchi will expand soon, but can you tell us by when you are planning to move to other places?from BTL initiatives."
A. The clients that we have acquired are not through any business pitches. We are doing work for them on a project basis, based on their immediate needs and requirements. On the successful culmination of these projects, we will formally get these businesses. There are around six or seven such businesses and, maybe a few months down the line, when we get these businesses, we will be ready to expand.
Q. How far does re-branding help an agency?
A. It certainly helps in focussing what their objectives are, but then there are dangers of it falling flat and remaining just a gimmick.
You have to be careful as to what your objectives are and what the need of the hour is for an individual organisation per se and, therefore, what is required to be done. It certainly helps in refocusing and some kind of rejuvenation. How much it helps shows on the deliverables of the client. All organisations come up with certain kinds of internal measures and these are internal measures to probably enhance their own productivity levels. It’s just that people exaggerate and look for deeper meanings.
"I am yet to meet people in advertising, who, without any solid reason, are unwilling to take on any new business."
Q. Internationally, many agencies use various tools to help them arrive at the best creative solution for their clients. Does M&C Saatchi adhere to any tools and methodology?
A. I wouldn’t call it our tool, but it’s our philosophy and way of life and we call it Brutal Simplicity. We firmly believe that it’s easier to complicate than to simplify and that simple messages tend to stay longer. We strongly feel that we should come up with ideas that are simple, so we won’t call it a mere tool. It reflects in our work, too. If you look at our positioning, we are probably an antidote to complexity. For this, we deliver ideas that are simple and, therefore, work most effectively in the marketplace. We help our clients achieve success on the basis of this philosophy.
Q. Can you explain this with the work you have done?
A. Sure, look at the British Airways (BA) campaign. Very simply put, BA gave us the brief that our task would be to confront the belief that BA is not meant for Indians. We came up with the idea that everybody knows that Indians have arrived in the global arena and are creating news across the world. BA, with its large network, can facilitate the global Indian traveller. Thereby came the insight that the world is ready to welcome India and the idea of executing that was through the ‘Namaste’. Therefore, the tagline that the world is waiting for you.
"Just because we are not being written about doesn’t mean that we are not bagging any new business."
Q. Can you tell us the highlight of the ten-year book that M&C Saatchi has released?
A. The ten-year book basically contains a selection of our work which we consider to be brilliant and effective, from our 13 offices across the Asia Pacific. It really demonstrates our philosophy and you can observe the power of Brutal Simplicity in the various ways in which we have executed ideas. Other than this, we don’t follow any other tenet; we just want to be brutally simple and not complicate matters. We hope that the next book, when it comes, will have a lot more creatives from India.
May 15, 2006
New Delhi
You can write to Kamal Oberoi at
[email protected]
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: ON RECORD : Ronnie Screwvala,CEO, UTV Software Communications Ltd
Ronnie Screwvala, CEO, UTV, is a true survivor of all the topsy-turvy meanderings of the media business. And yet, when you meet this shrewd businessman, you are pleasantly surprised by his upfront, easygoing personality. Founded in 1990, within a span of just 13 years, UTV has grown into one of the largest media houses in Asia.
Screwvala believes his 13-year career in media has really been a ‘masti ki pathshala’.
In an exclusive interview with Pritha Mitra Dasgupta of agencyfaqs!, Ronnie Screwvala talks about his journey from owner of a small cable television business in South Mumbai to CEO of UTV, which is today a pan-Asian media company.
Q. You started off with a small cable television business in 1981 and then you moved on to become the owner of one of the biggest media houses in India. How has life changed?
A. Life doesn’t change. It is an evolving process and a culmination of learning experiences. It is also about having the precise mixture of right kind of learning, putting that learning into practice, keeping your feet on the ground and having a very ambitious approach to life. However, you should also be realistic about your expectations and try not to get carried away by success.
In terms of actual work experience, I can say that starting the cable business in 1981, when nobody even understood the concept, was a much tougher proposition. But times have changed. I could never imagine that a movie such as ‘Rang De Basanti’ would do better than a normal commercial 'mirch-masala' flick. The crux of the story is that I have learnt a lot, but the hard way. The learning curve has only become sharper.
A. Firstly, we don’t have many lines of business. All we do is produce content and then distribute it. We are in the business of distributing content so that we can be at the top end of the value chain. That’s the nature of our business.
The content we produce is of various kinds, such as for the small screen, big screen and animation. It would also be incorrect to define them as different divisions. The core competency could be slightly different in terms of creative approach. However, at the end of the day, they are all about creating content. If you have a steel company, then there will different grades of steel, different aspects of steel. But if you look at the congruity, it is only one product. That’s how we conceive our business.
Today, for example, almost 70 per cent of the content produced for the big screen is viewed by audiences of the small screen. Movies do go through theatrical releases, but seven out of ten people watch them on DVD, cable, television or broadband.
Coming back to your question, the biggest challenge for us in Asia is that the business should be scalable. So, scale is important for us, not diversification. Therefore, we need to be as big as the US market. We are not going to get that from a domestic market, so we need to think global. So, scale, global, vertical pyramids, etc., are some of the aspects that I see us focusing on in the coming years.
At the end of the day, a content business can be scaled up as you want. This also includes opening up the international market for Indian content. In the last two years, we have done just that in the movie business. Something that Yashraj Films also did. But we are doing it for a different genre of movies.
Q. What is the share of revenue contributed by each division of UTV?
A. Fifty per cent of our revenue comes from our production of television content, air time sales, animation and post production. The remaining 50 per cent comes from movies and broadcasting (Hungama TV).
A. No, it doesn’t scare me. It all depends on the business model you follow. The first thing is that as a broadcaster, we could also have started off with a general entertainment channel based on our previous experience, but we strategically decided to stay away from that because you need deep pockets to survive in that genre.
Instead, we chose to enter the kids’ genre because it was less cluttered and also growing.
But I would like to mention that we are not just a broadcaster of a kids’ channel. Rather, we consider ourselves as marketers in the 4-14 years’ age group, which constitutes one-third of the Indian population. So, we plan to do everything that’s required to be in the 4-14 year old’s mindset. And a television channel happens to be one of the platforms that can be used to influence this age group and drive it to other platforms. This also increases the need to build Hungama as a stronger brand.
Our objective is to create content and distribute it. And the same is applicable for television as well as movies.
To most people in India, distribution is all about placing prints in theatres. On the contrary, distribution is all about marketing the product. I really believe that we wouldn’t have got half the success that we achieved for ‘Rang De Basanti’ had we not marketed it and distributed it ourselves.
Q. Tomorrow, if someone offers you a hefty price for Hungama TV, will you sell it off?
A. This is not the first time I’ve been asked that question. I have asked myself the same question at least ten times.
What I would like to say is that we at UTV are trying to building an overall integrated business model. So, building a brand for two years and then selling it off doesn’t make sense.
Secondly, in this model, broadcasting plays a very important role. But I also agree that we are open to partnerships as happened when Astro All Asia Entertainment Networks Ltd bought 26.01 per cent stake in Hungama TV.
With Astro’s investment, we can now look at expanding our operations in broadcasting and content in other Indian languages and also in other South East Asian countries. For instance, we are planning to launch the Tamil and Telugu feeds for Hungama TV in the next nine months.
Meanwhile, Astro is also looking at launching kids’ channels in Indonesia and Malaysia and UTV will be involved in those projects.
A. No, they are not yet over, but they have receded substantially. There is huge fatigue and zero innovation in this space.
Drama and aspiration is in the Indian DNA. So, it is not something that will vanish instantly. All I can say is that it used to dominate at one point, but it doesn’t now.
Q. Unlike the youth of yesteryears, today’s generation doesn’t really connect with MTV or Channel [v] any more. Some one-off shows here and there don’t make much impact. Do you think there is a dearth of content in the Indian television space to engage the young viewers who comprise 60 per cent of the audience base?
A. Young viewers are the most elusive ones. Their exposure level to access to information is so different today that their attention span is also substantially more under stress, if not limited. Television is not the only source of entertainment for these viewers as they are also into outdoor activities.
So, to engage them in television, you really need to have compelling content. And for that, you need to look at their likes and dislikes.
I agree that there hasn’t been enough content for this group, which also includes kids and teenagers. This is also why these viewers have got driven to the general entertainment channels.
The obvious question is: What’s the solution to this? And as we are in this business, we believe that content will drive viewership and, therefore, we need to make investments in this space.
A. No, I don’t think that. There is a fair amount of experimentation going on. If you see some unique concepts such as ‘The Great Indian Laughter Show’ or ‘Nach Baliye’, they are not ‘filmi’. Singing, dancing and ‘antakshari’ are in our DNA.
I think the Bollywood syndrome and hangover in television has gone away for a long time. Today, the top 50 programmes on television are not movies. At one point in time, the Top 50 list always included either ‘Ramayan’ or ‘Mahabharat’ or movies or Top 10 song programmes. Now these programmes are used to complete the programming mix.
Talking about other kinds of shows that might work on Indian television, I will say there is always scope for innovation. Today, ‘Laughter Challenge’ has done tremendously well on Indian television, but it is not a new concept. There have been stand-up comedians in the US for the last 50 years. What’s important is the way a show is presented to the Indian audience.
The irony is that in India, we judge the success or failure of a show based on its TRPs, but that is irrelevant. India television is too fragmented to do that.
Worldwide, channels such as Discovery, HBO and Nickelodeon are quite successful as they follow a subscription model. Their success does not depend on TRP ratings. India will evolve similarly once we get a proper distribution mechanism in place.
Q. It has been more than a year since Hungama TV was launched. Are you satisfied with the way the channel has shaped up?
A. We have already taken up and broken the mould. In a market that has big international brands such as Cartoon Network, Pogo and Disney, we, as a local player, were able to eat into their share.
Even in terms of programmes, our shows, ‘Doraemon’ and ‘Hero’, are among the top shows on any kids’ channel.
Today, Disney is almost half the size we are. And we have enough data to prove that. This makes us the clear number two in this segment. So, we are quite happy with our performance.
A. Yeah, it was a strategic decision at that time. After Bose quit, there was an internal restructuring. Now we have separate heads for marketing, sales, distribution and programming. And since then, both this structure and the team have worked exceptionally well. So, now we do not feel the need for a COO, at least at this point of time.
In fact, the structure of having a COO works better for a larger organisation. The existing structure works better for organisations like ours, which are still in an early stage.
Q. When most of the media houses in India are venturing into radio, was it a strategic decision to keep away from this sector? Or is it that you do not plan to get into too many things?
A. I think radio is a good futuristic concept. I think it will take some four to five years and huge capital investments and losses as well. If someone says it is going to grow exponentially, I do not believe it. I think the two or three big players will be fine because a lot of them have got cross-media abilities. Suddenly, there’s been a huge surge – from 90 stations, it has become 300 stations. But that doesn’t mean the Rs 400 crore business will become Rs 4,000 crore, it might become Rs 600 crore at the most. But the operational costs in the sector have gone up from Rs 1,000 crore to Rs 4,000 crore.
So, I don’t think radio will be an at all profitable model in the next three to four years. I see money going in and not coming out, except for just one or two players. So, from our point of view, this is a business that I don’t mind entering at a later stage, but I don’t want to be a pioneer. At least not for this concept.
A. Usually, the partnership doesn’t depend on strategy, though it needs to. Gone are the days when one used to spend only 5 per cent of the production budget on marketing, and that mainly to let people know that the movie is playing at a nearby theatre.
However, today, a movie is a brand. Also today, advertisers are looking for unique opportunities because they are not getting true value in the normal TRP-led television advertising. Today, most advertisers are interested in ground events and unique tie-ups.
Then you have to sit down with the brand and understand what it is offering. In ‘Rang De Basanti’s case, we could do a clothes line, a Coca-Cola bottle, LG could come with a mobile phone, etc. The problem is that most producers and directors are very insecure about showing their movie to too many people. We had no qualms about screening the movie two months before its theatrical release. That makes a big difference.
Mumbai
You can write to Ronnie Screwvala at
[email protected]
"Radio is still a futuristic concept."
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ronnie Screwvala,
CEO, UTV Software Communications Ltd[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ronnie Screwvala,
CEO, UTV Software Communications Ltd[/FONT]
Screwvala believes his 13-year career in media has really been a ‘masti ki pathshala’.
In an exclusive interview with Pritha Mitra Dasgupta of agencyfaqs!, Ronnie Screwvala talks about his journey from owner of a small cable television business in South Mumbai to CEO of UTV, which is today a pan-Asian media company.
Q. You started off with a small cable television business in 1981 and then you moved on to become the owner of one of the biggest media houses in India. How has life changed?
A. Life doesn’t change. It is an evolving process and a culmination of learning experiences. It is also about having the precise mixture of right kind of learning, putting that learning into practice, keeping your feet on the ground and having a very ambitious approach to life. However, you should also be realistic about your expectations and try not to get carried away by success.
In terms of actual work experience, I can say that starting the cable business in 1981, when nobody even understood the concept, was a much tougher proposition. But times have changed. I could never imagine that a movie such as ‘Rang De Basanti’ would do better than a normal commercial 'mirch-masala' flick. The crux of the story is that I have learnt a lot, but the hard way. The learning curve has only become sharper.
"I could never imagine that a movie such as ‘Rang De Basanti’ would do better than a normal commercial ‘mirch-masala’ flick."
Q. UTV is into various lines of business, be it a satellite channel, movies, production, animation, distribution or television production. Five years down the line, what will be UTV’s core focus area?
A. Firstly, we don’t have many lines of business. All we do is produce content and then distribute it. We are in the business of distributing content so that we can be at the top end of the value chain. That’s the nature of our business.
The content we produce is of various kinds, such as for the small screen, big screen and animation. It would also be incorrect to define them as different divisions. The core competency could be slightly different in terms of creative approach. However, at the end of the day, they are all about creating content. If you have a steel company, then there will different grades of steel, different aspects of steel. But if you look at the congruity, it is only one product. That’s how we conceive our business.
Today, for example, almost 70 per cent of the content produced for the big screen is viewed by audiences of the small screen. Movies do go through theatrical releases, but seven out of ten people watch them on DVD, cable, television or broadband.
Coming back to your question, the biggest challenge for us in Asia is that the business should be scalable. So, scale is important for us, not diversification. Therefore, we need to be as big as the US market. We are not going to get that from a domestic market, so we need to think global. So, scale, global, vertical pyramids, etc., are some of the aspects that I see us focusing on in the coming years.
At the end of the day, a content business can be scaled up as you want. This also includes opening up the international market for Indian content. In the last two years, we have done just that in the movie business. Something that Yashraj Films also did. But we are doing it for a different genre of movies.
Q. What is the share of revenue contributed by each division of UTV?
A. Fifty per cent of our revenue comes from our production of television content, air time sales, animation and post production. The remaining 50 per cent comes from movies and broadcasting (Hungama TV).
"We are in the business of distributing content so that we can be at the top end of the value chain."
Q. We have seen television production houses venturing into broadcasting. But most of them were eventually forced to sell the brand. Does that scare you?
A. No, it doesn’t scare me. It all depends on the business model you follow. The first thing is that as a broadcaster, we could also have started off with a general entertainment channel based on our previous experience, but we strategically decided to stay away from that because you need deep pockets to survive in that genre.
Instead, we chose to enter the kids’ genre because it was less cluttered and also growing.
But I would like to mention that we are not just a broadcaster of a kids’ channel. Rather, we consider ourselves as marketers in the 4-14 years’ age group, which constitutes one-third of the Indian population. So, we plan to do everything that’s required to be in the 4-14 year old’s mindset. And a television channel happens to be one of the platforms that can be used to influence this age group and drive it to other platforms. This also increases the need to build Hungama as a stronger brand.
Our objective is to create content and distribute it. And the same is applicable for television as well as movies.
To most people in India, distribution is all about placing prints in theatres. On the contrary, distribution is all about marketing the product. I really believe that we wouldn’t have got half the success that we achieved for ‘Rang De Basanti’ had we not marketed it and distributed it ourselves.
Q. Tomorrow, if someone offers you a hefty price for Hungama TV, will you sell it off?
A. This is not the first time I’ve been asked that question. I have asked myself the same question at least ten times.
What I would like to say is that we at UTV are trying to building an overall integrated business model. So, building a brand for two years and then selling it off doesn’t make sense.
Secondly, in this model, broadcasting plays a very important role. But I also agree that we are open to partnerships as happened when Astro All Asia Entertainment Networks Ltd bought 26.01 per cent stake in Hungama TV.
With Astro’s investment, we can now look at expanding our operations in broadcasting and content in other Indian languages and also in other South East Asian countries. For instance, we are planning to launch the Tamil and Telugu feeds for Hungama TV in the next nine months.
Meanwhile, Astro is also looking at launching kids’ channels in Indonesia and Malaysia and UTV will be involved in those projects.
"We strategically decided to stay away from general entertainment because you need deep pockets to survive in that genre."
Q. UTV has been into television software production for a long time. As a close watcher of the industry, do you think the days of the ‘saas-bahu’ shows are over?
A. No, they are not yet over, but they have receded substantially. There is huge fatigue and zero innovation in this space.
Drama and aspiration is in the Indian DNA. So, it is not something that will vanish instantly. All I can say is that it used to dominate at one point, but it doesn’t now.
Q. Unlike the youth of yesteryears, today’s generation doesn’t really connect with MTV or Channel [v] any more. Some one-off shows here and there don’t make much impact. Do you think there is a dearth of content in the Indian television space to engage the young viewers who comprise 60 per cent of the audience base?
A. Young viewers are the most elusive ones. Their exposure level to access to information is so different today that their attention span is also substantially more under stress, if not limited. Television is not the only source of entertainment for these viewers as they are also into outdoor activities.
So, to engage them in television, you really need to have compelling content. And for that, you need to look at their likes and dislikes.
I agree that there hasn’t been enough content for this group, which also includes kids and teenagers. This is also why these viewers have got driven to the general entertainment channels.
The obvious question is: What’s the solution to this? And as we are in this business, we believe that content will drive viewership and, therefore, we need to make investments in this space.
"We plan to do everything that’s required to be in the 4-14
year old’s mindset."
Q. What are the other kinds of shows that can work on Indian television? We either see Bollywood related game shows or ‘saas-bahu’ dramas. Do you think television production companies don’t experiment much?year old’s mindset."
A. No, I don’t think that. There is a fair amount of experimentation going on. If you see some unique concepts such as ‘The Great Indian Laughter Show’ or ‘Nach Baliye’, they are not ‘filmi’. Singing, dancing and ‘antakshari’ are in our DNA.
I think the Bollywood syndrome and hangover in television has gone away for a long time. Today, the top 50 programmes on television are not movies. At one point in time, the Top 50 list always included either ‘Ramayan’ or ‘Mahabharat’ or movies or Top 10 song programmes. Now these programmes are used to complete the programming mix.
Talking about other kinds of shows that might work on Indian television, I will say there is always scope for innovation. Today, ‘Laughter Challenge’ has done tremendously well on Indian television, but it is not a new concept. There have been stand-up comedians in the US for the last 50 years. What’s important is the way a show is presented to the Indian audience.
The irony is that in India, we judge the success or failure of a show based on its TRPs, but that is irrelevant. India television is too fragmented to do that.
Worldwide, channels such as Discovery, HBO and Nickelodeon are quite successful as they follow a subscription model. Their success does not depend on TRP ratings. India will evolve similarly once we get a proper distribution mechanism in place.
Q. It has been more than a year since Hungama TV was launched. Are you satisfied with the way the channel has shaped up?
A. We have already taken up and broken the mould. In a market that has big international brands such as Cartoon Network, Pogo and Disney, we, as a local player, were able to eat into their share.
Even in terms of programmes, our shows, ‘Doraemon’ and ‘Hero’, are among the top shows on any kids’ channel.
Today, Disney is almost half the size we are. And we have enough data to prove that. This makes us the clear number two in this segment. So, we are quite happy with our performance.
"To most people in India, distribution is all about placing prints in theatres. On the contrary, distribution is all about marketing the product."
Q. After the exit of Purnendu Bose from Hungama, no one has replaced him as COO. Is it a strategic decision to do away with the designation of COO?
A. Yeah, it was a strategic decision at that time. After Bose quit, there was an internal restructuring. Now we have separate heads for marketing, sales, distribution and programming. And since then, both this structure and the team have worked exceptionally well. So, now we do not feel the need for a COO, at least at this point of time.
In fact, the structure of having a COO works better for a larger organisation. The existing structure works better for organisations like ours, which are still in an early stage.
Q. When most of the media houses in India are venturing into radio, was it a strategic decision to keep away from this sector? Or is it that you do not plan to get into too many things?
A. I think radio is a good futuristic concept. I think it will take some four to five years and huge capital investments and losses as well. If someone says it is going to grow exponentially, I do not believe it. I think the two or three big players will be fine because a lot of them have got cross-media abilities. Suddenly, there’s been a huge surge – from 90 stations, it has become 300 stations. But that doesn’t mean the Rs 400 crore business will become Rs 4,000 crore, it might become Rs 600 crore at the most. But the operational costs in the sector have gone up from Rs 1,000 crore to Rs 4,000 crore.
So, I don’t think radio will be an at all profitable model in the next three to four years. I see money going in and not coming out, except for just one or two players. So, from our point of view, this is a business that I don’t mind entering at a later stage, but I don’t want to be a pioneer. At least not for this concept.
"Building a brand for two years and then selling it off doesn’t make sense."
Q. Talking about the marketing for movies, ‘Rang De Basanti’ tied up with so many brands, which also led to merchandising. The concept of co-branding with films is on the rise. How does a film choose the correct brand partners and vice versa?
A. Usually, the partnership doesn’t depend on strategy, though it needs to. Gone are the days when one used to spend only 5 per cent of the production budget on marketing, and that mainly to let people know that the movie is playing at a nearby theatre.
However, today, a movie is a brand. Also today, advertisers are looking for unique opportunities because they are not getting true value in the normal TRP-led television advertising. Today, most advertisers are interested in ground events and unique tie-ups.
Then you have to sit down with the brand and understand what it is offering. In ‘Rang De Basanti’s case, we could do a clothes line, a Coca-Cola bottle, LG could come with a mobile phone, etc. The problem is that most producers and directors are very insecure about showing their movie to too many people. We had no qualms about screening the movie two months before its theatrical release. That makes a big difference.
Mumbai
You can write to Ronnie Screwvala at
[email protected]
nick18_in
MP Guru
Leaders Space: ON RECORD: Rajat Sharma,chairman and editor-in-chief, India TV
It’s definitely a role reversal. The man who has grilled several eminent personalities in his ‘adalat’ is on the other side of the dock now, facing a barrage of questions to which he replies with candour. Rajat Sharma, chairman and editor-in chief, India TV, might be on unfamiliar territory, but in this interview with Tuhina Anand of agencyfaqs!, he talks with ease and sincerity.
Sharma was editor of several print publications before he ventured into television. In a short span, he has managed to bring his company, Independent News Service, to the level of a mainstream news channel. This surge ahead can be attributed to Sharma’s credibility and courage in bringing news as and when it happens to his viewers. The channel, which is known for its sting operations, has had its quota of controversies, but Sharma is not deterred by this. He is determined to go ahead with his journalistic endeavours. The future of India TV is intact with Sharma as its leader, and he talks of how the news channel is attempting to coopt viewer information and be a news channel driven by people...
Q. It's been more than a year since India TV was launched. It has managed to garner only 5-6 per cent of the viewership share among Hindi news channels. Are you satisfied with the channel's current performance?
A. One is never satisfied with one’s performance or the viewership one gets. The silver lining is that India TV is the only channel that has hit the top on at least 10-12 occasions in the last one year. And it has not been just because of one or two stories.
Whenever we have done a good show, we have managed to reach the number one position. It only goes to prove the point that India TV has the potential of being in the top slot. So, I am satisfied that India TV has proved this point at least a dozen times.
A. It’s true that initially, there were rapid fluctuations in India TV’s viewership. But ever since we started with our three-hour weekly show, ‘Breaking News’, this fluctuation is happening less often. This definitely is a challenge. But we are confident and working towards retaining the top slot.
Q. Do you think India TV has managed to find a place among the consideration set of viewers watching Hindi news?
A. I think so. Gauging from the kind of response we get from our viewers, I would believe that the channel has managed to be among the consideration set. For five days since we broke the ‘Kaun Banega Crorepati 2’ (‘KBC2’) story, I can say that we received a phenomenal response, be it through SMS or e-mail. Similarly, when we did the story on how the Nigerians are duping people, it got a tremendous response. Getting feedback from viewers, be it positive or negative, matters.
We have also started asking our viewers to send in information or videos and the response we have got is overwhelming. This only goes to prove that people are watching the channel.
A. The gap is there because the first four channels, Zee News, NDTV India, STAR News and Aaj Tak, have been there for more than five years, while we are just one year plus. When these channels entered the market, it was not so competitive. We entered at a time when the market was really competitive. Even so, India TV has been successful in making a place for itself. We were able to hit the top of the slot several times. It only shows that we have the potential of being at the top.
Q. Prior to the launch of India TV, you had said that news channels were becoming sensational and India TV would not resort to sensationalism. But now with a series of sting operations, don't you think your deeds and your words are contradicting each other?
A. There isn’t a single instance when India TV has done sensational journalism. We have always refrained from it and will continue to do so in the future.
It all depends on what one calls sensational. Whatever we have done has always been for a purpose and in the public interest.
A. No, I would not. While covering the MLA story, we censored all the sensational portions. Had we not done that, people could have called us sensational. The purpose of the story was to let the world know about the deeds of politicians.
In that context, Shakti Kapoor was a much larger issue. I still maintain that it was a public service story. It was an eye-opener for many young girls who landed in Mumbai with stars in their eyes.
Q. How exactly do you define public service?
A. I will give you a small example. If Shakti Kapoor was having an affair with someone, or what he does with his wife in his bedroom – all that is nobody’s business. But if he is using his position to lure someone, then I think it is in the public interest to let the world know about it. So, it varies from case to case.
One has to draw a line somewhere and it’s the editors who need to differentiate between a public interest story and a sensational story.
Had our stories been sensational, we would not have received more than 70,000 messages in one day, most of them supporting us. Similarly, even on the ‘KBC 2’ story, we got a tremendous response from the public, saying that they felt cheated.
A. We have replied to their legal notice. We have also sent a legal notice to STAR, Sameer Nair and other people for defamation. In an interview to ‘Mumbai Mirror’, Deepak Segal said that everything that happens at India TV is a scam. He has also lied blatantly that India TV never got in touch with STAR before doing the story. We sent two letters to Nair and a third to Peter Mukherjea. We have acknowledgment of those letters, with Mukherjea even saying that he would get back to us in due course. If they lie so blatantly, then we have no option but to take legal action.
Q. Do you think the way to break the clutter in the Hindi news segment is by going regional? Will India TV venture into this segment?
A. Going regional definitely helps. We are looking at the Gujarati and Punjabi markets because these two also have international reckoning. Punjabis and Gujaratis are spread all over the world and, wherever they are, they would want to see the news in their own language. So, these are the two markets at which we are looking. We will probably have a 24-hour Gujarati news channel in the next six months and Punjabi in another nine months’ time.
A. As far as India TV is concerned, we can say that we are not competing with the GECs. Others might be doing that in order to retain their position. I am first a journalist and then a businessman. It’s juxtaposed such that I am the editor and also the owner. But the fact is that, for me, journalistic values are definitely more important. I am convinced that this is what is going to take us forward. India TV is different from other channels because our channel enjoys trust and credibility with the people. And this is something that is long lasting. Sensationalism in a half-hour show or personal relationships are temporary. We are looking for a longer relationship with the viewers.
Q. With every second channel delivering breaking news every day, do you think that the entire strength of breaking news has gone? Even India TV has a three-hour programme called ‘Breaking News’ five days a week.
A. Yes, I completely agree with you. ‘Breaking News’, Flash’, ‘Exclusive’ – all these words have lost their sanctity. A press conference can never be breaking news. But when we call our show ‘Breaking News’, we definitely break at least one story a day. When we say this is a breaking story, either we break stories or we give a new dimension to existing stories. For us, that is breaking news.
A. No if the news is actually breaking, you should call it that. Let us leave it to the viewers to decide what they accept as breaking news and what they don’t.
As far as India TV is concerned, we don’t pass off anything and everything as breaking news. If there is something major that needs to be brought to the viewers’ attention, we call it a news flash. If there is something really big, then we call it breaking news.
Q. All news channels these days ensure a print tie-up – NDTV with the ‘Indian Express’, Headlines Today with its sibling, ‘India Today’, CNN-IBN with ‘Hindustan Times’ and Times Now with ‘The Times of India’. What will single channels such as India TV do? Are such tie-ups of any help to the channels?
A. If there is a big story, then we normally share it with ‘Mid-Day’ in Mumbai. It is not a tie-up, but an understanding. Once in a while, we also have an arrangement with the Bhaskar group of papers. It helps because to my mind, television viewers and newspaper readers are two different segments completely. And it is important for newspapers to get into the television market and for TV to get into newspaper. So how I get my stories known to the readers is by having them published in a large circulation newspaper.
A. News channels all over the world are anchor driven. It’s the anchor who gets identified, but the anchor’s backbone is content. You can’t have an anchor with no content. If an anchor is leading good content, it gives weightage and this is how it is done all over the world.
You can say that, initially, it was only me, but now there are at least three others – Sudhir Chaudhri, Abul Nasr Iqbal and Roopa Saxena. And we have six others. Within six months, we will build a battery of presenters who will be as good as I am. We are really working hard on it.
India TV is not just about Rajat Sharma and it should not be perceived in that way. It has taken me several years to reach where I am. And I am sure others will reach faster than I did. All these years of doing STAR News and NDTV, Prannoy Roy could only create Barkha Dutt and Rajdeep Sardesai. And Prannoy (Roy) does not anchor very often, so that way, one can say NDTV is only about Barkha. The positive side, if you see, is that no other Hindi news channel, be it STAR News, Aaj Tak or NDTV India, has any known anchor either. At least India TV has one recognised face, so it puts us in an advantageous position.
Q. In the initial phase, you tried a few celebrity faces such as Maneka Gandhi and Tarun Tejpal, but it doesn’t seem to have worked out. What went wrong?
A. Maneka Gandhi had her political problems, so could not continue. We tried Tarun, but it seemed that he was better cut out for print rather than for TV. It did not work out. I picked him up because I thought he would be a valuable resource, but I think he preferred to write books and newspapers rather than do TV. TV may have been too demanding, it takes too much of your time.
A. Right now, we have our hands full, so we are definitely not thinking of diversifying. When I said entertainment, I was stating a five-year plan. That’s a little far away.
Q. How has the news consumption habit of viewers changed since India TV was launched or since you have been in the business of news?
A. I think it’s a changing India, an India that’s getting younger. The young generation is getting interested in news and they are interested in the subjects of the modern age. I have noticed that people now want to know more about the economy, business houses, airlines, computers and mobile phones.
A. I think it’s a lazy reporter’s job because it’s easy to do a glamour story. I am not saying that people don’t want to know about glamour or cinema and you don’t get to watch glamour and entertainment on India TV, but there are other sectors such as an auto expo, where we go out of our way to cover it.
You cannot give a single example of news being trivialised on India TV. Other channels might be doing it and I am no one to comment on that, but India TV doesn’t.
Q. Is India TV a profitable venture now? Isn't there any pressure from the investors?
A. India TV will break even in the next three months’ time, I mean break even operationally. Why will there be pressure from investors when everything is going as per the plan? We did not plan that India TV would break even on day one. Any channel takes time.
There are channels that have taken five years to break even. In two years’ time, we will be able to break even and we are heading towards that. When we started, we got 17 brands of advertisers for the channel; in the month of December 2005, we had 80 brands; the number of advertisers went up from 17 to 68.
A. We believe in hard news with speed and fewer features. News as and when it is happening. It is the only Hindi news channel that is anchor driven. India TV is the only channel that has interactivity with the viewers and is directly in touch with its viewers for 24 hours. We get information from viewers and we use it. All our big stories have come to us from our viewers, be it the Govinda-Dawood story, the Iskcon temple being demolished in Moscow, or tigers being electrocuted in the forest of Madhya Pradesh. We have worked hard on them – that’s a different thing. At least two or three stories in ‘Breaking News’ comes from the viewers. At India TV, people dictate the news and this is something being done all over the world.
New Delhi
You can write to Rajat Sharma at
[email protected]
"India TV is not sensational, it’s public service."
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Rajat Sharma,
chairman and editor-in-chief, India TV[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Rajat Sharma,
chairman and editor-in-chief, India TV[/FONT]
Sharma was editor of several print publications before he ventured into television. In a short span, he has managed to bring his company, Independent News Service, to the level of a mainstream news channel. This surge ahead can be attributed to Sharma’s credibility and courage in bringing news as and when it happens to his viewers. The channel, which is known for its sting operations, has had its quota of controversies, but Sharma is not deterred by this. He is determined to go ahead with his journalistic endeavours. The future of India TV is intact with Sharma as its leader, and he talks of how the news channel is attempting to coopt viewer information and be a news channel driven by people...
Q. It's been more than a year since India TV was launched. It has managed to garner only 5-6 per cent of the viewership share among Hindi news channels. Are you satisfied with the channel's current performance?
A. One is never satisfied with one’s performance or the viewership one gets. The silver lining is that India TV is the only channel that has hit the top on at least 10-12 occasions in the last one year. And it has not been just because of one or two stories.
Whenever we have done a good show, we have managed to reach the number one position. It only goes to prove the point that India TV has the potential of being in the top slot. So, I am satisfied that India TV has proved this point at least a dozen times.
"We are confident and working towards retaining the top slot."
Q. Though India TV has managed to be in the top slot because of an occasional story, it has never sustained that position for long. The TVRs have moved back to their usual place the day after. How do you plan to retain the top slot?
A. It’s true that initially, there were rapid fluctuations in India TV’s viewership. But ever since we started with our three-hour weekly show, ‘Breaking News’, this fluctuation is happening less often. This definitely is a challenge. But we are confident and working towards retaining the top slot.
Q. Do you think India TV has managed to find a place among the consideration set of viewers watching Hindi news?
A. I think so. Gauging from the kind of response we get from our viewers, I would believe that the channel has managed to be among the consideration set. For five days since we broke the ‘Kaun Banega Crorepati 2’ (‘KBC2’) story, I can say that we received a phenomenal response, be it through SMS or e-mail. Similarly, when we did the story on how the Nigerians are duping people, it got a tremendous response. Getting feedback from viewers, be it positive or negative, matters.
We have also started asking our viewers to send in information or videos and the response we have got is overwhelming. This only goes to prove that people are watching the channel.
"Gauging from the kind of response we get from our viewers, I would believe that India TV has managed to be among the consideration set."
Q. We have seen that Indian news channels are divided into two lots. The first lot has four channels, which enjoy a close to 75 per cent of the market share. India TV falls in the second category, where the other four channels fight for the remaining 25 per cent channel share. Why do you think there is such a huge gap?
A. The gap is there because the first four channels, Zee News, NDTV India, STAR News and Aaj Tak, have been there for more than five years, while we are just one year plus. When these channels entered the market, it was not so competitive. We entered at a time when the market was really competitive. Even so, India TV has been successful in making a place for itself. We were able to hit the top of the slot several times. It only shows that we have the potential of being at the top.
Q. Prior to the launch of India TV, you had said that news channels were becoming sensational and India TV would not resort to sensationalism. But now with a series of sting operations, don't you think your deeds and your words are contradicting each other?
A. There isn’t a single instance when India TV has done sensational journalism. We have always refrained from it and will continue to do so in the future.
It all depends on what one calls sensational. Whatever we have done has always been for a purpose and in the public interest.
"There is a huge gap between the first four channels and the rest because the first four channels have been there for more than five years, while we are just one year plus."
Q. So, you are not ready to call the Shakti Kapoor episode or MLA story sensational?
A. No, I would not. While covering the MLA story, we censored all the sensational portions. Had we not done that, people could have called us sensational. The purpose of the story was to let the world know about the deeds of politicians.
In that context, Shakti Kapoor was a much larger issue. I still maintain that it was a public service story. It was an eye-opener for many young girls who landed in Mumbai with stars in their eyes.
Q. How exactly do you define public service?
A. I will give you a small example. If Shakti Kapoor was having an affair with someone, or what he does with his wife in his bedroom – all that is nobody’s business. But if he is using his position to lure someone, then I think it is in the public interest to let the world know about it. So, it varies from case to case.
One has to draw a line somewhere and it’s the editors who need to differentiate between a public interest story and a sensational story.
Had our stories been sensational, we would not have received more than 70,000 messages in one day, most of them supporting us. Similarly, even on the ‘KBC 2’ story, we got a tremendous response from the public, saying that they felt cheated.
"There isn’t a single instance when India TV has
done sensational journalism."
Q. So where is the STAR controversy headed?done sensational journalism."
A. We have replied to their legal notice. We have also sent a legal notice to STAR, Sameer Nair and other people for defamation. In an interview to ‘Mumbai Mirror’, Deepak Segal said that everything that happens at India TV is a scam. He has also lied blatantly that India TV never got in touch with STAR before doing the story. We sent two letters to Nair and a third to Peter Mukherjea. We have acknowledgment of those letters, with Mukherjea even saying that he would get back to us in due course. If they lie so blatantly, then we have no option but to take legal action.
Q. Do you think the way to break the clutter in the Hindi news segment is by going regional? Will India TV venture into this segment?
A. Going regional definitely helps. We are looking at the Gujarati and Punjabi markets because these two also have international reckoning. Punjabis and Gujaratis are spread all over the world and, wherever they are, they would want to see the news in their own language. So, these are the two markets at which we are looking. We will probably have a 24-hour Gujarati news channel in the next six months and Punjabi in another nine months’ time.
"While covering the MLA story, we censored all the sensational portions. Had we not done that, people could have called us sensational."
Q. Do you think news channels with their dramatised and sensational way of presenting news are competing with general entertainment channels (GECs)? Or do we say that news has become more interesting than the ‘saas-bahu’ serials? This kind of programming may deliver higher TVRs at times, but will result in the channels losing their identity in due course of time.
A. As far as India TV is concerned, we can say that we are not competing with the GECs. Others might be doing that in order to retain their position. I am first a journalist and then a businessman. It’s juxtaposed such that I am the editor and also the owner. But the fact is that, for me, journalistic values are definitely more important. I am convinced that this is what is going to take us forward. India TV is different from other channels because our channel enjoys trust and credibility with the people. And this is something that is long lasting. Sensationalism in a half-hour show or personal relationships are temporary. We are looking for a longer relationship with the viewers.
Q. With every second channel delivering breaking news every day, do you think that the entire strength of breaking news has gone? Even India TV has a three-hour programme called ‘Breaking News’ five days a week.
A. Yes, I completely agree with you. ‘Breaking News’, Flash’, ‘Exclusive’ – all these words have lost their sanctity. A press conference can never be breaking news. But when we call our show ‘Breaking News’, we definitely break at least one story a day. When we say this is a breaking story, either we break stories or we give a new dimension to existing stories. For us, that is breaking news.
"If Shakti Kapoor was having an affair with someone, or what he does with his wife in his bedroom – all that is nobody’s business. But if he is using his position to lure someone, then I think it is in the public interest to let the world know about it."
Q. Should the channels just do away with the concept of breaking news? What is the point when every channel is showing the same thing and passing it off as an exclusive?
A. No if the news is actually breaking, you should call it that. Let us leave it to the viewers to decide what they accept as breaking news and what they don’t.
As far as India TV is concerned, we don’t pass off anything and everything as breaking news. If there is something major that needs to be brought to the viewers’ attention, we call it a news flash. If there is something really big, then we call it breaking news.
Q. All news channels these days ensure a print tie-up – NDTV with the ‘Indian Express’, Headlines Today with its sibling, ‘India Today’, CNN-IBN with ‘Hindustan Times’ and Times Now with ‘The Times of India’. What will single channels such as India TV do? Are such tie-ups of any help to the channels?
A. If there is a big story, then we normally share it with ‘Mid-Day’ in Mumbai. It is not a tie-up, but an understanding. Once in a while, we also have an arrangement with the Bhaskar group of papers. It helps because to my mind, television viewers and newspaper readers are two different segments completely. And it is important for newspapers to get into the television market and for TV to get into newspaper. So how I get my stories known to the readers is by having them published in a large circulation newspaper.
"Had our stories been sensational, we would not have received more than 70,000 messages in one day. And most of them supported us."
Q. What makes or breaks a news channel? The people (anchors/journalists) or the content? If it's anchors, we haven't really seen any known faces on India TV. It seems that the entire burden of India TV is only on Rajat Sharma?
A. News channels all over the world are anchor driven. It’s the anchor who gets identified, but the anchor’s backbone is content. You can’t have an anchor with no content. If an anchor is leading good content, it gives weightage and this is how it is done all over the world.
You can say that, initially, it was only me, but now there are at least three others – Sudhir Chaudhri, Abul Nasr Iqbal and Roopa Saxena. And we have six others. Within six months, we will build a battery of presenters who will be as good as I am. We are really working hard on it.
India TV is not just about Rajat Sharma and it should not be perceived in that way. It has taken me several years to reach where I am. And I am sure others will reach faster than I did. All these years of doing STAR News and NDTV, Prannoy Roy could only create Barkha Dutt and Rajdeep Sardesai. And Prannoy (Roy) does not anchor very often, so that way, one can say NDTV is only about Barkha. The positive side, if you see, is that no other Hindi news channel, be it STAR News, Aaj Tak or NDTV India, has any known anchor either. At least India TV has one recognised face, so it puts us in an advantageous position.
Q. In the initial phase, you tried a few celebrity faces such as Maneka Gandhi and Tarun Tejpal, but it doesn’t seem to have worked out. What went wrong?
A. Maneka Gandhi had her political problems, so could not continue. We tried Tarun, but it seemed that he was better cut out for print rather than for TV. It did not work out. I picked him up because I thought he would be a valuable resource, but I think he preferred to write books and newspapers rather than do TV. TV may have been too demanding, it takes too much of your time.
"We will probably have a 24-hour Gujarati news channel in the next six months and Punjabi in another nine months’ time."
Q. Any plans of diversifying into fields other than news? What happened to your plans of launching an entertainment channel?
A. Right now, we have our hands full, so we are definitely not thinking of diversifying. When I said entertainment, I was stating a five-year plan. That’s a little far away.
Q. How has the news consumption habit of viewers changed since India TV was launched or since you have been in the business of news?
A. I think it’s a changing India, an India that’s getting younger. The young generation is getting interested in news and they are interested in the subjects of the modern age. I have noticed that people now want to know more about the economy, business houses, airlines, computers and mobile phones.
"‘Breaking News’, Flash’, ‘Exclusive’ – all these words have
lost their sanctity."
Q. So why do we get to see only glamour and entertainment on TV?lost their sanctity."
A. I think it’s a lazy reporter’s job because it’s easy to do a glamour story. I am not saying that people don’t want to know about glamour or cinema and you don’t get to watch glamour and entertainment on India TV, but there are other sectors such as an auto expo, where we go out of our way to cover it.
You cannot give a single example of news being trivialised on India TV. Other channels might be doing it and I am no one to comment on that, but India TV doesn’t.
Q. Is India TV a profitable venture now? Isn't there any pressure from the investors?
A. India TV will break even in the next three months’ time, I mean break even operationally. Why will there be pressure from investors when everything is going as per the plan? We did not plan that India TV would break even on day one. Any channel takes time.
There are channels that have taken five years to break even. In two years’ time, we will be able to break even and we are heading towards that. When we started, we got 17 brands of advertisers for the channel; in the month of December 2005, we had 80 brands; the number of advertisers went up from 17 to 68.
"It seemed that Tarun (Tejpal) was better cut out for print rather
than for TV."
Q. News channels today are blamed to be following the herd mentality. How is India TV different from the rest?than for TV."
A. We believe in hard news with speed and fewer features. News as and when it is happening. It is the only Hindi news channel that is anchor driven. India TV is the only channel that has interactivity with the viewers and is directly in touch with its viewers for 24 hours. We get information from viewers and we use it. All our big stories have come to us from our viewers, be it the Govinda-Dawood story, the Iskcon temple being demolished in Moscow, or tigers being electrocuted in the forest of Madhya Pradesh. We have worked hard on them – that’s a different thing. At least two or three stories in ‘Breaking News’ comes from the viewers. At India TV, people dictate the news and this is something being done all over the world.
New Delhi
You can write to Rajat Sharma at
[email protected]
vengabeats
Par 100 posts (V.I.P)
Hey Nick Gr8 posts