Interesting thoughts and interesting correlations. While the correlations are correct the allegation I am not sure is. I am not too sure that FM has no control over the GDP rate. The gestation period of impact of several policy decisions in todays economic conditions are much more faster and infact reflect within a year. Ofcourse there are factors like monsoons and its resultant impact that they can hardly do anything about. But then they would have factored the forecasts of that.

In a service industry driven economy the impact is infact felt within 2 quarters. If inflamation and coalition politics was to give FM a free hand, and ofcourse if there was intent (which we all hope there is), the GDP impact can be felt in 2 quarters I feel. Case in point if he was to ease up control on money, lending would ease up, loans would ease up, housing sector would witness growth (players like ICICI would take max a week to put peddal on sales), hence related industries would start to get boost. Its a whole cycle.

Anyways quite liked your writings. You can visit by blog rohitjain.wordpress.com for some different perspectives on business and people challenges.

He just meant - “Look, everyday new skeletons keep falling off the cupboard of big Wall Street banks by way of MTM losses. Look at our own backyard - ICICI bank, HDFC Bank, Kotak and even SBI have started making provisions in millions of $$. Now that affects liquidity in the system badly and mars the leverage plans of hedge funds/private equity that drove huge FDI/FII flows into India. I look to RBI guv for leads into future but he knows nothing more than to hike CRR by 50 bps at every sneeze. The guy is equally clueless as I am. So what do you want me to do. I’ll just stop at “aim”ing. Nice word, will help me cover my back if I get off-target by a mile. Come on people. Gimme a break!”

“Goal setting in Sales is a whole can of worms. Don’t make me open that one!”

Why do you think I made the comparison? Siddharth is even offering a can opener!

But, yes, the rest of the post was serious.

I am shipping you a can opener. Please use it when you write the next blog.

I want to understand ‘Goal setting in sales’. Someone has to decide where you should go (A), someone tracks where you are heading (B), and someone tracks where you are today (C).

Information about yesterday or today is easy; but what is the science behind projecting tomorrow. I have seen http://www.farecast.com but I want to understand salescast.

Have a good weekend!

Goal setting in Sales is a whole can of worms. Don’t make me open that one!

I think projections or estimates is the right way to think about GDP growth, especially, when one is talking about the year one is in.

You say: “A goal, IMO, is something that is ‘actionable’, i.e. you and your team can take actions which help you achieve that goal.”

It made me smile because nearly all sales jobs - not least in the Indian IT services firms - set goals as ‘bare minimum must-achieve’ numbers, and then there are stretch targets at which the bonus begins to matter.

Likewise I do not see PC setting a goal. The 9% is a stretch target given current conditions. The 8-9% is a realistic range he thinks - yes, subjectively - that can be achieved.

In the UK, economic growth rates are set out as projections, not goals or expectations. Just projections. Might that be a better word?

You make several good points. Cause and effect are related in the real world by really complex ways. Most of the times, we are inferring a cause and effect relationship, and not well. Human tendency is to take advantage of this and one of the ways we do it is to take credit for it ourselves if we happen to be overseeing the outcomes when they occur.

That I think is an action to reach the goal - if it was ever a goal. I agree with you that it was more a “suggestion” instead, and the ministry can do little more than to echo data that indicates where we might end up.

It’s difficult to distinguish between an action that causes a long term result versus a short-term one. Because the long term result may happen due to a multitude of factors, like luck, rains, frog croaking or whatever, and it’s an argument only in hindsight.

Two books - “Blink” and “Freakonomics” talk about the same event - dramatic reduction in crime in the 90s in the US.

Reasons for those were usurped by the authorities of that time, including better policing, infrastructure or what you may. The books disagree. One book says says there was a tipping point, at which crime moved down, and that point was somewhere in between. Reasons could be anything.The other suggests that it was the Roe vs. Wade ruling in the late 70s that effectively legalised abortion which resulted in a lower crime rate as less unwanted children were born after then. And thus, less such children reached an age where they would otherwise take to crime.

I think statistics can be massaged to meet whichever of the above conclusions you want. I think I would rather believe in magic than go through the exercise. I also think most managers that take credit for the result of the decisions know secretly that there was more magic to it than their input, but that doesn’t give them a bigger raise.

Perhaps that’s why the Indian system had family based work cultures - if your father was a jeweller, you had to be one etc. The funda is: if your father had a good long-term strategy, you’ll earn the money and it stays in the family. It’s a wild thought but it puts an end to credit-snatching. What you want to be really, is a passive owner of the business where people are fighting for such credit. That’s the only person coming out better in the process.