The 5 student associations that left IIM-A better in FY12 than in FY11

Earlier, I'd blogged about the cold rational logic about why student associations on campus conduct events and competitions for various motives.(http://iimaexperiences.blogspot.com/2012/01/college-festivalscompetitions-winwin.html). With the imminent handover of these clubs to the junior batch, I thought I would give my 2paise on the student bodies that made a lasting impact on campus OR showed a dramatic improvement over the achievements of last year. I must confess firstly that I did not have personal knowledge of all events/activities on campus(for instance I was not much involved in Chaos events/cultural activities) so excuse me for missing out certain people/clubs. And also, due to conflict of interest, I do not list BETA(The finance and investments club of IIMA) of which I'm a member!  And while other student bodies do organize rems etc, I included the top 5 which I think made the best impact.

1. Messcom:-The mess quality/variety improves at lower prices compared to last year, with a record number of 'special dinners'-open free of charge to the entire student community. While Joos was shutdown without a wholly satisfactory arrangement, the committee did do its task well, and ensured new food outlets/better menus etc. Kudos to Mohit Garg and his team
2. Entre:-The entrepreneurship cell was quite active in its core work(Entre shop), conducting competitions and co-organizing speakers sessions etc. And of course, the pricing of the merchandise was quite reasonable. Kudos to Selvamuthukumaran('Selva') and his team.
3. Public Policy SIG:-Set up this year by my floor mate Akash Bansal, this SIG was quite active with speaker sessions, monthly magazine and co-organizing Ideafest with Entre. It did improve the politics/current affairs awareness on campus to a good extent.
4. Alumni Cell:-Their series of guest lectures, alumni outreach efforts etc culminated in a great Golden Jubilee concluding session in Dec11. While student participation somewhat reduced towards the end, they did great work. Good work by Tejesh Kinariwala.
5. CultComm:-While only time will tell the entire effect, they did do a good work of organizing a New year party(a first ever for IIM Ahmedabad) which saw great attendance from outside campus as well. Other events like Janmashtami celebrations etc were also good. Great work by Nizar and team.

Lets hope the student bodies for FY12-13 do an equally good job and carry forth the traditions

Getting the best out of your MBA peer study group

One thing about an MBA is that while it is quite individualistic in most aspects(one competes fiercely during academics, placements, scholarships etc), the concept of a study group forces you to develop a working relationship with atleast 5 members a year(more if the composition changes for different subjects/terms as it happens for the second year). One should carefully note that the 'study group' is neither a system(where people are interrelated , working towards a common goal) nor a team(with defined roles and hierarchy). A group does transform into a team over time with the informal group processes setting up norms, Dos and Don'ts and implicit power structure. While free riders are not directly penalized(everyone gets the same grade), some professors ask the team members to rate each other's contribution to group activity, and this rating carries some weight on the coursework. And where the groups are reformed periodically OR voluntarily formed for subjects later, then it no longer stays a single shot single period game(in game theory jargon) but translates into a multi period multi shot game. But this assumes people are rationale. If someone has joined Bschool only for self maximization/chilling out, then that sense of responsibility towards group work does erode. I've lost times of the occasions where my group(or even others) experienced issues with this. 

As a dear friend half jokingly mentioned on his Facebook status, "I love free riders because they sharpen my skills'. But remember, this comes at a cost to you-whether you realize it or not. So be wary of bailing out the other group members always. Some things I and others found useful are

1. Coopt whom you know/someone vouched for-track records is a good indicator of the tendency to free ride in the future!
2. Smaller group size-for evident reasons, smaller groups easier to manage
3. Split task into modules, allot to each person/sub group-that ensures accountability
4. Meet atleast once-it is then easier to coordinate online/over phone
5. Keep same group across subjects/events if possible-that makes an equitable division more probably if you play multiple shot games with the same team rather than single shot games, and also allows for unexpected adjustments later! Also, one learns more about the group with later stages, and can accordingly predict better about task times.
6. Have a coordinator-implicit or explicit-while most groups tend to form one, not having that is a recipe for disaster. so someone HAS to take the initiative, atleast for each task and the buck must stop there, else recipe for disaster.
7. Informal meetings to celebrate good grades/meetings over coffee etc all help build the required rapport, needed when you need to appeal to a member to sacrifice his night's sleep to help finish the group task(for example). 

the above kind of illustrate the issues with managing peers. 

Why student associations selections/competition rankings methology need to be opaque

Days after the final selection process of a IIMA 'elite' club was done, I noticed emails from unsuccessful applicants asking for the evaluation criteria and/or their performance during the process. My first impulse was to reply with a frank response, but then deeper reflection and some discussion with other club members led me to the conclusion that 'Silence was golden' in this case.

Supreme Court judges have famously said that 'sunlight is the best disinfectant', or that transparency is the best way to ensure a clean and healthy system. Well, that is fine but only till a point. For some 'club goods' like higher education, club memberships,  etc, the demand will invariably outstrip any possible supply by far. And rather than judge the intrinsic value of the good/their own suitability for it, applicants follow herd mentality and apply en-masse for that. Now, the best the selecting person(s) can do is to widely list their expectations from candidates, activities etc. But to enumerate their desired profile down to the finest detail like marking scheme, candidate performance etc, is going too far. Once someone releases information publicly, that can be ground for challenge under some law. Allocation decisions necessarily are arbitrary, and involve some degree of discretion/judgement/public policy. Disclosing the basis of that would lead to delaying tactics(filing PILs), gaming the system(Kota like coaching hubs) etc. And disclosing applicant results may lead to bitterness against the evaluators, which is much more impactful in a student body selection where the evaluators are likely to be one's own seniors.

And the same is true for competitions. Releasing the detailed methodology AND the final scores sheet, would takeaway the discretion from the organizers/judges to tweak the ranking approach in the last minute. Also, disgruntled elements could point at selective components to buttress their case for better rankings, and point fingers at organizers. So for the above reasons, this post title seems justified, in larger good.

How puffery beats out understated hardwork in club selections

In many Bschools, now is the time of the year where the various student bodies on campus are reformed as the leadership transitions to the junior match. That reminds me of the time when we ourselves invited applications from the incoming juniors. Depending on the college, club and student profile, some bodies were swamped with so many applications, that they do not get time to interview everybody. Imagine a 10member club, getting 150 applications. Even allowing 10min/interview, one would need 25hrs to finish the process. IF you divide the club into 5 2member teams, then they could finish the whole process in 6hrs(5hrs+1hr  break). But then, no one has the patience/time for so many interviews/interactions-atleast not for the same role. And then the issue starts.

Imagine that you are a pressed for time, cynical club member, who needs to review applications and then give a take on it. If you have to review applications to gauge the sincerity of the candidate, you would ideally read through it fully. But otherwise, you may just look at the length of the application(especially those with long answers) and prioritize for interviewing those who have given the longest answers! And even otherwise, those who are modest may not give full details of their achievements, and their new seniors would not typically know them well enough to link that details. While those with a penchant for exaggeration, could write relatively minor points and make a better impression.

While the IIM Ahmedabad placement process puts a stop to this by insisting on a simple ONE page CV, only a few clubs impose word limits etc on the answer. So till everyone shifts to a standard length limit, the above situation is bound to happen. Thankfully, the problem I described is unlikely to happen when a newly elected club president selects his peers for the club, but it would affect the incoming junior batch selection, which eventually decides the club transition in a large way. So this issue does matter.

What the student mess can teach about management

All residential institutes have a mess, with the contract usually a monopoly of a single caterer for the whole college. In come colleges(especially IITs/NITs/IIMs), the student body via an elected Mess Committee alnt mess can teach about so has oversight into aspects like menu, enforcing contracts, terms and conditions, renewal decisions etc. It struck me the other day, that the mess can be a great management teaching tool in the following ways, for the students involved in the process. WHILE I'm not in the Mess Committee, below is my understanding/analysis of the process

• Explaining monopoly:-Student Mess is usually a limited monopoly for breakfast, while outside tiffen suppliers may supply other meals. So the contract may/may not reflect that
• Learning to play the regulation game-Regulation IS a game with parties concerned trying to optimize their pie. So structuring the conditions to minimize gaming is essential, for both parties, and the negotiations would reflect that.
• Food forecasting/estimation-While usually the mess contractor's headache, the students also would try to minimize wastage by limiting portion servings, awareness messages and cooking vessels management.
• Optimizing waiting times:-That is a classical Operations Issue of balancing capacity and waiting time, which only a SLA can ensure!
• Evaluating bids:-Reputation, Track Record and flexibility among other things need to be evaluated, and that is a training for future bid evaluation
• Dealing with incomplete contracts:-Since not all eventualities can be anticipated in the contract, this is a necessary eventuality. Instances like new menu items, flexible timings, bulk coupon purchases etc need to be negotiated.
• Customer Service:-Since the mess committee members are the first point of contact for any complaints, they better learn to take it with a smile and politely!And to their credit, this year's committee under Mohit Garg has done a stellar job

What surprises me however, is the lack of faculty involvement in the Mess. They usually do NOT eat in the mess, and so are usually indifferent to it. And to my knowledge, no professor in the above areas is ever approached with advice in that regard. Which makes me wonder whether Professors practice what they preach in that regard.