It seems crystal clear to everyone in Singapore that having a good education is extremely important. Education itself is very important in training the mind to think and express itself. Most people feel that without a solid education (and that means getting a good degree), you will never make it in society? Should it be so or rather should it dicate what our destiny is like?
All over the world, everyone is studying frantically to get at least a degree. In fact, a degree is now so common that you have to be 'one notch' higher than the rest and get that master's degree. In my humble opinion, I feel that people studying for master's program are often risk adverse in their approach in life. Allow me to qualify what I mean by risk adverse.
More often (realise that I use the words 'more often'), people study further because they want a good quality of life for themselves and family. When you ask people why do they want to study for a master's, the answer is usually:
"I need to get ahead of the rest"
"There's no further promotion if I don't carry on"
"After getting it, I'm sure the company will pay me better"
The above reasons show that a person studies simply because he wants a better quality of life. This makes a person want to get a better job or a higher pay to comensurate his time in studies. By doing so, he cannot be develop the entreprenuer within him/her because they are looking for a high paying job. This effectively eradicates the risk taking nature because this person finds comfort in the better quality of life.
If you think about it, there are many people who are successful in life because they did not take the usual route of life. People like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Michael Dell never finished a degree course. Sim Wong Hoo, Singapore's sound blaster prodigy only had a diploma and a big dream. These people had 'nothing' but dared to dream BIG. Not only they dreamt, but they pursued it with a great hunger for success. They did not let their 'lack of education' stop them from overcoming their obstacles in life.
I'm not putting down education, but just wondering if it does make us risk adverse? Well, that's a question for us all to deliberate on.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Sunday, July 16, 2006
When was the last time you had fun when you learnt something?
Imagine one day you sit in a class where you have to sit down infront of the teacher or lecturer, staring at him for hours, trying to figure out what he is trying to say. You are pounded by rapid sentences from his mouth that never seems to end. All the sudden, your vision is blur and you start to keep those heavy eye lids from closing. You start to take a blink, a longgggggggg blink and suddenly you find yourself drifting into a blissful sleep.
Is that your typical day in school or a workshop?
Why does it seem that those who are teaching or conducting workshops not engaging us in a certain level of participation? Isn't it their job to make things exciting so that people can learn better or more? Is it their responsibility or should it be ours because we need to learn? My answer is simply all parties need to take responsibility. Let me explain...
Teachers need to engage their students in their lessons, stimulating interests as well as providing content. Can you remember the previous time you did well in a particular subject was because your teacher was clear in presenting concepts and made you really like the subject? Students on the other hand need to take personal responsibility to learn well. If we keep blaming teachers on their inability to teach, we have just committed ourselves to academic suicide. If we make another person responsible for teaching us, then we have not learn to be independent in our learning and will struggle very hard when most things in life are not taught in the classrooms but from life's lessons.
The magic question is "How do we stimulate interest?"
Let me approach this from a simplistic point of view- What makes something fun? If you can answer this, interest in a particular subject will naturally come. Let me give you an example, in the university, we were competing in a design competition where we had to design side car mirrors. At the end of the term, we had to present our ideas to a car making company and urge them to take it up. The Lecturer was good enough to allow us to come out with simply outrageous ways of designing the mirrors.
First, the groups studied the actual gears and motors needed to turn the mirrors. After that, we tried all different ways to do so, ranging from giving a mouse cheese to run on a treadill, using push buttons for controls, heating coils to move mirrors and so on. Even the presentation itself was funny, you could actually see people wearing similar wigs or people painted their faces to look like clowns. There was also a home video on guy who does does not seem to be distracted by beautiful woman walking past him but in the end he was so distracted by looking at the car mirror that he nearly got into an accident. Imagine all the presentation was done infront of company executives and we were actually assessed for our final marks!
The lesson from this is that the lecturer created an environment that really made us enjoy as well as learn about automotive parts. If we need to teach something, let us teach with creativity and excitement.
A teacher has not taught until a student has learnt
Is that your typical day in school or a workshop?
Why does it seem that those who are teaching or conducting workshops not engaging us in a certain level of participation? Isn't it their job to make things exciting so that people can learn better or more? Is it their responsibility or should it be ours because we need to learn? My answer is simply all parties need to take responsibility. Let me explain...
Teachers need to engage their students in their lessons, stimulating interests as well as providing content. Can you remember the previous time you did well in a particular subject was because your teacher was clear in presenting concepts and made you really like the subject? Students on the other hand need to take personal responsibility to learn well. If we keep blaming teachers on their inability to teach, we have just committed ourselves to academic suicide. If we make another person responsible for teaching us, then we have not learn to be independent in our learning and will struggle very hard when most things in life are not taught in the classrooms but from life's lessons.
The magic question is "How do we stimulate interest?"
Let me approach this from a simplistic point of view- What makes something fun? If you can answer this, interest in a particular subject will naturally come. Let me give you an example, in the university, we were competing in a design competition where we had to design side car mirrors. At the end of the term, we had to present our ideas to a car making company and urge them to take it up. The Lecturer was good enough to allow us to come out with simply outrageous ways of designing the mirrors.
First, the groups studied the actual gears and motors needed to turn the mirrors. After that, we tried all different ways to do so, ranging from giving a mouse cheese to run on a treadill, using push buttons for controls, heating coils to move mirrors and so on. Even the presentation itself was funny, you could actually see people wearing similar wigs or people painted their faces to look like clowns. There was also a home video on guy who does does not seem to be distracted by beautiful woman walking past him but in the end he was so distracted by looking at the car mirror that he nearly got into an accident. Imagine all the presentation was done infront of company executives and we were actually assessed for our final marks!
The lesson from this is that the lecturer created an environment that really made us enjoy as well as learn about automotive parts. If we need to teach something, let us teach with creativity and excitement.
A teacher has not taught until a student has learnt
Sunday, July 09, 2006
The Law of Priorities
I've been reading alot of principles from the book "The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership" by John Maxwell. This was one of the topics that impressed me alot. Allow me to share some thoughts and quotes.
"Leaders understand that activity is not necessarily accomplishment"
This statement hit me like a hard brick. I always gave myself a pat on the back to encourage myself for doing many things at one time. This is made even worse by the fact that I'm a choleric. Howver, I do admit that the quote above bears merit. I can be doing so much, but does the things that I do really matter? Not everything that demands for my attention is important, even though they are urgent.
I believe that every task falls into 4 categories:
Urgent and important
Urgent and unimportant
Not Urgent and important
Not Urgent and unimportant
The challenge for myself is whether I can differentiate them at all times. Everthing single thing should be viewed from the 4 categories and dealt with accordingly. Therefore, the appropiate amount of time should also be allocated according to its severity. A major question arises: Are we spending enough time on the things that really matter?
A fine example of an effective leader is displayed by Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric. When he assumed leadership in 1981, the company stock traded at $4/share & was worth $12 billion. It was a HUGE and diverse company that included 350 strategic businesses. Jack began a total revolution and changed the entire profile of the company. He simply asked whether their businesses and products could be No.1 or No.2? Of the 348 businesses or product lines that could not, he closed some and divested others. He used the money earned to reinvest in the ones that remained and further strengthened them with acquisitions. He focused on a few supporting operations and 14 world class businesses, all well positioned for the 90's, either being the 1st or 2nd in the world market in which it participates.
Since he took over, GE's stock experienced a 2:1 split 4 times. And it traded more than $80/share since the writing of the book. It also became one of the most valuable company in the world with a market capitalisation of more than $250 billion.
What made GE one of the best companies in the world? Jack knew that it was always important to align people to what really matters and the end of the day. Thus this brought tremendous success.
My question for you today is:
What are we going to focus on the few things that will bring us the highest reward? If not, we might just be like a headless chicken, running around with no aim.
"Leaders understand that activity is not necessarily accomplishment"
This statement hit me like a hard brick. I always gave myself a pat on the back to encourage myself for doing many things at one time. This is made even worse by the fact that I'm a choleric. Howver, I do admit that the quote above bears merit. I can be doing so much, but does the things that I do really matter? Not everything that demands for my attention is important, even though they are urgent.
I believe that every task falls into 4 categories:
Urgent and important
Urgent and unimportant
Not Urgent and important
Not Urgent and unimportant
The challenge for myself is whether I can differentiate them at all times. Everthing single thing should be viewed from the 4 categories and dealt with accordingly. Therefore, the appropiate amount of time should also be allocated according to its severity. A major question arises: Are we spending enough time on the things that really matter?
A fine example of an effective leader is displayed by Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric. When he assumed leadership in 1981, the company stock traded at $4/share & was worth $12 billion. It was a HUGE and diverse company that included 350 strategic businesses. Jack began a total revolution and changed the entire profile of the company. He simply asked whether their businesses and products could be No.1 or No.2? Of the 348 businesses or product lines that could not, he closed some and divested others. He used the money earned to reinvest in the ones that remained and further strengthened them with acquisitions. He focused on a few supporting operations and 14 world class businesses, all well positioned for the 90's, either being the 1st or 2nd in the world market in which it participates.
Since he took over, GE's stock experienced a 2:1 split 4 times. And it traded more than $80/share since the writing of the book. It also became one of the most valuable company in the world with a market capitalisation of more than $250 billion.
What made GE one of the best companies in the world? Jack knew that it was always important to align people to what really matters and the end of the day. Thus this brought tremendous success.
My question for you today is:
What are we going to focus on the few things that will bring us the highest reward? If not, we might just be like a headless chicken, running around with no aim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)