Distortion of a Healthy Entertainment

I was sitting idle and browsing channels, when Antakhsari passed through. It was one of my favourite programs and I used to watch it regularly, but because of other indulgences, could not see it for a long time. So, there was no second thought on continuing the same channel for next half an hour.

I came to know that it was second last round of Antakhsari ‘Mahasngram’. It Sounded competition with more difficult levels played at broader geographical levels. With teams coming from different regions, it was understood that the competition was at national level. Rounds were more difficult and innovative and I expected the even better level of entertainment as I used to get a couple of years back

However, what I came across was a horrible version of a concept, which used to be simply entertaining to audience, highly encouraging to participants and had healthy competition touch. Now, it is no more an urge to display the talent and to perform better, rather objective is to beat the other teams. You cannot simply sit and enjoy the songs and the game. Now there are emotional moments, angry situations and depressing comments. Emotional levels are unusually very high.

It felt uneasy to see participants sobbing on making a mistake or on losing points. They expressed anger at other teams getting something which they felt was not justified. Even audience is adding to this whole drama. Over and above, Anchors, rather than encouraging and creating light atmosphere, acted as catalyst or even worse, perpetuator, to the whole emotional enactment.

There is nothing wrong in being upset over your mistake or on you losing the game. It is also right to express your protest against unjustified actions. However, disturbing fact is the unnatural and exaggerated manner, in which the emotions were expressed and screened. What rules the whole show is exaggerated emotions, high tension levels and a compulsion to perform to beat others.

There is no more a feeling of having watched a beautiful competition, where participants showed their talent. Now it has become a matter of life and death. Now it is a matter of your respect, respect of your family, respect of your city, your region. So you cannot afford to lose. You must win, at any cost.

Observe the faces of participants in different situations. They are so tense at all times. There is no calmness or serenity or a sense of self assurance. Anchors have been repeating – it is grand competition, how important it is for them not to lose. And they have not told this to only participants, they have been shouting this to whole world. Now the pressure levels are immense. Voice of anchors is reflecting from people around and getting magnified. You are representing the region, you cannot let us down. You will bring shame on us, if you lose.


Participants’ faces have hardened in a strive not to lose, audience are flowing with the same emotional turbulence and anchors are ensuring never to let it come down. What gets crumpled under the weight of these heavy emotions is the underlying goal of the program - Goal to provide a melodious evening to audience; Goal to provide a platform, an encouragement to the budding talent; Goal to play antakshari in a professional and entertaining manner. With this, the whole concept, whole meaning of the program is lost. What comes out of the program is the depressed eyes of losing teams, and over inflated winners filled not with satisfaction and happiness of winning but with hollow superiority complex.

Where are we going? Why we are distorting the simple things? Misguided commercialization is the answer. Sponsors want more audience and all exercise is to attract and involve audience into the program. Market and marketers believe that audience can get attached to program only if there are emotional ups and downs in the program. There should be emotional display of anger and fear. Audience should be able to feel sympathy or anger or support or protest for particular teams. Only when these levels are maintained, they believe, audience will stick to the program, otherwise they will get bored of it.

It is pity that Marketers have been so short sighted in their thinking and conceptualising. It is true that these things attract audience and make them feel attached to the program. But question is whether it is sustainable. You can read or watch news of rap, accidents, murder, scandal upto a limit. But do you feel good about it or does it leave you with a good feeling. No, rather it generates distaste with time. Then you want to feel good at heart, you need something simple, something natural, something close to heart. These are the things with lasting impact. People might get temporary attraction to exaggerated display of fear, lust and emotions, but it is never long lasting.
Further, even in short term, does these programs give desired results to marketers? Marketers can consult psychologist to understand if the person watching commercials during such programs will develop distaste for the products also. The blind race started by product companies, perpetuated by marketers, followed by television programs and played by talented participants has resulted into nothing but lose-lose situation, in which whoever participates, loses, including the winner.

5 Day Week: From Organisations’ Perspective

What is the difference between a 5 day week and 6 day week?

As it looks on its face, it is a loss of 9 hours per person per week for the company, which translates to 468 hours per person per year. So, for any manufacturing concern, it means that a worker who is producing 54 units under 6 day week, shall produce 45 units in a 5 day week (loss of capacity of 17%).

The above conclusion is based on the premise that the productivity or efficiency of an employee is directly proportionate to the number of hours spent by him in the organization. Experts give further explanation on efficiency, which measures it as a product of ability and willingness of a person towards his work. Ability can be in terms of physical strength and capabilities, aptitude, skills, etc. Willingness is the person’s inner drive to get involved into the assignment and to complete it in qualitative manner. Let us analyse the how number of hours at work is correlated to the person’s efficiency.

Number of hours spent by a person on work affects him in two ways. First, time spent at work gives person a deep satisfaction of learning for himself and contributing to the organization. Every person has a conscious or unconscious urge to act towards a meaningful purpose and work provides him this opportunity. In absence of a meaningful activity, person might feel good initially about not being required to do anything, but shall very soon realize the emptiness and shall get frustrated. Thus, number of hours spent at work is an important source of satisfaction for a person, whether he/she realizes it or not.

Second effect of working hours is on his life beyond office. Besides being involved on a meaningful job in the organisation, person spends his time for himself, family, friends and society and this investment of time is equally important for him as being at work. Though the proportion of time spent on these may vary from person to person, every person needs time for these activities. Time spent for self includes time for relaxation, entertainment, self development, spirituality, etc.

It should be noted here that every person, at any given point of time, is a product of his complete past, specially the closest past. It means that, person cannot leave his emotions at home and work like a machine at office. At the same time, office atmosphere affects the way, he behaves at home. Thus, from organisation’s point of view, the person who enters the office premises is a complete human being, whose efficiency at work is not irrespective of what happens outside office hours or the way he is spending his full day, week and year. It means that the time spent by person on self, with family and friends and in society, affects the productivity of person at work.

This may be partially true for mechanical or clerical jobs, however, it is a significant factor affecting the efficiency at managerial levels. Further, as the responsibility levels go up, these factors become even more important.

Now, interestingly, number of working hours are inversely proportionate to the number of hours, he/she can use for self, family, friends and society. Obviously, an organization, paying for the person’s time, cannot afford to lose that time for the sake of him/her spending time elsewhere and from that point of view even a 7 day week is desirable. At the same time, matured organizations know that only a happy person (at personal and official level), who is content with what he possesses at present, and who has an eye on to the next bigger goal, can be the most effective person at work. These are the organizations, which keep their focus on developing the person in all respects (not on how much time he is sitting at his desk), because they know that this is the only way to get the best output from people.

Now, what does it take to develop a person in all respects and to make him happy and content. First need is to make him happy at work. This can be done by providing those assignments, where his interest lies, by giving more challenges, allowing independence, providing timely and honest feedback, celebrating success, giving recognition and rewards for good work and developing an atmosphere of trust and confidence,. Management needs to believe that people are willing and are able to put their best.

Secondly, person needs to be given sufficient opportunity to relax and rejuvenate. Relaxation enhances person’s efficiency. Continuous engagement at work gradually reduces the efficiency of the person. Organising events, outbound programs and gatherings at organizational level is very effective in this direction. Further, person is just not a worker or an employee. He has his own personal and social aspirations and he should be able to spend time with himself, family, friends and society. These things rejuvenate him and give him fresh energy to take up higher tasks. Moreover, these activities (along with challenging work) give him satisfaction of living a complete meaningful life. Thus, it is important from the point of view of organisation to provide person sufficient time and opportunity for the relaxing and refreshing activities beyond work.

Thus, for an organization to benefit from person’s best output, (among other things) it needs to strike a right balance between number of hours spent by him at work and beyond work. One extreme is to make him work whole day all 7 days. Another extreme is to allow him to work as and when he wishes. Different levels have been discovered and experimented at different times.

A decade and a half back, when responsibilities on individuals were not high, pressure levels were moderate or low and working hours were limited, 6 day weeks were manageable. However, at present times, when there is no limit on working hours, pressure levels are mounting and every person handles critical responsibilities, it is imperative that the person needs to be given time, opportunity and avenue to rejuvenate himself to gear up for these activities. This is the reason, why most of the organistions have adopted 5 day week in their work culture.

It can be noted here that 5 day week does not reduce the output level of person. On the contrary, his productivity and effectiveness gets better. The same has been experimented in organizations world over. It has been observed that in most of the cases, people spend disproportionate amount of time on work. The six day work does not necessarily take six days and can be effectively framed within five days. The principal ‘work occupies the time available’ applies in most of the organisations and functions. It makes them habitual (rather addictive) of long working hours and their efficiency level goes down.

Interestingly, in many cases, people sitting on desks is an illusion of productivity. Surprisingly, the illusion is not only for bosses but even for the person himself. He starts believing that he is putting extra efforts and is the busiest person around. At the same time, he wonders why people putting lesser efforts (because they leave office on time and do not work on weekends) are being rewarded and are happier.

Person doing job with limited working hours and days, does a more focused and quality job than other people. Here, it should be noted that if need is critical, people anyways come on weekends and even stay late to complete the work. It is rather sometimes fun to come on weekend for few hours, in an informal atmosphere and to do things without usual tense work atmosphere. However, if people are given choice and freedom, they can utilize time in more productive manner.

It is critical that management take account of the responsibilities and work load, put systems in place for systematic processes and place adequate manpower to meet the requirements. Most importantly, management needs to understand and believe that the work does not necessarily need 6 days and can be completed in 5 days. It is only perception of management, a fear of losing something, which stops management from moving to 5 day week regime. In the present work conditions, 5 day week is the right balance for the development of person as well as for the benefit of organization.