Hi All , I have gone through this interesting article, you guys would like it too. Thanks Sumeet Motwani.
From India, Thana
From India, Thana
Dear Sumeet,
The story of course is good, thoughtful and full of theme, but the question arises, how it has been linked to reaction or response, that is quite strange. I must say, the author has not been able to link his story to the right perspective of management. It is just a matter of thought perception depending upon person to person. For example in the sub-heading of the story he has written, “an intelligent person responds; a fool reacts.” that means, if we react to any untoward event to avoid that or to get rid of that, we can be considered as fools by the author of that story. And, if we adapt ourselves to a wrong thing in response, we would be considered as intelligent. Moreover, there is no introduction of the author, whether he is a scholar or a 10th class student, who would have the authority to treat intelligent managers as fools, if they react to any undesirable and unwanted event, where their reaction is needed on the spur of moment. I must say, what we read, must not follow blindly, but analyze critically, what part of the story we can adopt and what part can we treat as redundant. The author of the story could have though some difference between the words react and respond due to his mental perception, but he did not clarify what according to him was the actual difference between a response and reaction to an incident. I don't think there is any distinction between the words react and respond and if there is any there would just be a very thin line of distinction to us those words in different situations. Reacting does not mean only in negative sense. Similarly responding also does not always means positively. If you react, you react to whatever you have received from the other party. May be you react positively or negatively. Similarly, if you respond, it is the same thing, as you respond to whatever you receive from the other party. May be you respond positively or negatively.
In the present story, we can't say both the women reacted to the flying and sitting of the cockroach upon them and the waiter responded for the similar activity of the cockroach. Both the women and the waiter can be said to have reacted on the action of the cockroach and also can be said to have responded to the action of the cockroach on them. May be their reaction or response was quite different due to their respective mental state. Both the women and the waiter wanted to get rid of the cockroach. That was reaction of all to the cockroach riding on them. Where is question of response to the cockroach? The cockroach did not want any person to fly and ride on cockroach in response. Naturally, both the women reacted and cried out of fear psychosis in them that would have been developed due to their cultural background, while the waiter would have been seasoned to react calmly to such type of incidents. The other difference is that the cockroach came flying all of a sudden and sat on the first woman then the 2nd woman without there getting any moment to think about the solution to the problem, while the waiter had been seeing the women struggling with the problem. The action of all the actors was just to react to the action of the cockroach and ultimately get rid of that. A single instance cannot become the yardstick of any one being intelligent and the others as fools.
So, I must stress, as a management personnel, we need to give proper thought instead of adopting anything blindly. Of course, the story gives us lesson of keeping patience, thoughtfulness and innovation. So, from the story, we can learn to become innovative how to get rid of the bad things in the management.
PS Dhingra
Vigilance & Transformation Management Consultant
Dhingra Group of management & Educational Consultants
New Delhi
From India, Delhi
387The story of course is good, thoughtful and full of theme, but the question arises, how it has been linked to reaction or response, that is quite strange. I must say, the author has not been able to link his story to the right perspective of management. It is just a matter of thought perception depending upon person to person. For example in the sub-heading of the story he has written, “an intelligent person responds; a fool reacts.” that means, if we react to any untoward event to avoid that or to get rid of that, we can be considered as fools by the author of that story. And, if we adapt ourselves to a wrong thing in response, we would be considered as intelligent. Moreover, there is no introduction of the author, whether he is a scholar or a 10th class student, who would have the authority to treat intelligent managers as fools, if they react to any undesirable and unwanted event, where their reaction is needed on the spur of moment. I must say, what we read, must not follow blindly, but analyze critically, what part of the story we can adopt and what part can we treat as redundant. The author of the story could have though some difference between the words react and respond due to his mental perception, but he did not clarify what according to him was the actual difference between a response and reaction to an incident. I don't think there is any distinction between the words react and respond and if there is any there would just be a very thin line of distinction to us those words in different situations. Reacting does not mean only in negative sense. Similarly responding also does not always means positively. If you react, you react to whatever you have received from the other party. May be you react positively or negatively. Similarly, if you respond, it is the same thing, as you respond to whatever you receive from the other party. May be you respond positively or negatively.
In the present story, we can't say both the women reacted to the flying and sitting of the cockroach upon them and the waiter responded for the similar activity of the cockroach. Both the women and the waiter can be said to have reacted on the action of the cockroach and also can be said to have responded to the action of the cockroach on them. May be their reaction or response was quite different due to their respective mental state. Both the women and the waiter wanted to get rid of the cockroach. That was reaction of all to the cockroach riding on them. Where is question of response to the cockroach? The cockroach did not want any person to fly and ride on cockroach in response. Naturally, both the women reacted and cried out of fear psychosis in them that would have been developed due to their cultural background, while the waiter would have been seasoned to react calmly to such type of incidents. The other difference is that the cockroach came flying all of a sudden and sat on the first woman then the 2nd woman without there getting any moment to think about the solution to the problem, while the waiter had been seeing the women struggling with the problem. The action of all the actors was just to react to the action of the cockroach and ultimately get rid of that. A single instance cannot become the yardstick of any one being intelligent and the others as fools.
So, I must stress, as a management personnel, we need to give proper thought instead of adopting anything blindly. Of course, the story gives us lesson of keeping patience, thoughtfulness and innovation. So, from the story, we can learn to become innovative how to get rid of the bad things in the management.
PS Dhingra
Vigilance & Transformation Management Consultant
Dhingra Group of management & Educational Consultants
New Delhi
From India, Delhi
I agree with Mr. P.S. Dhingra's opinion; the author's credentials as a behavioral or motivational writer are doubtful; as the story does not offer any novel insight or knowledge.
People "react" instinctively in case of a situation which occurs suddenly and the reaction is based on their learned "responses" earlier.
For instance, if a hot iron is placed on someone's skin, he will "react" instantly !!! (Members are invited to try this experiment, at their own risk).
People "respond", when they have 'time to respond', which is a well-thought out response to an stimuli.
To give an example, in the Pavlovian experiment; the learned "response" of the dogs to salivate, becomes conditioned after several repetitions; to become a "reaction" - which an instantaneous response.
It is downright crass and funny to find that the author calls people who react, as fools.
I think, the hot iron experiment should be tried on the author to find out whether he 'reacts' or 'responds' !!
From India, Delhi
People "react" instinctively in case of a situation which occurs suddenly and the reaction is based on their learned "responses" earlier.
For instance, if a hot iron is placed on someone's skin, he will "react" instantly !!! (Members are invited to try this experiment, at their own risk).
People "respond", when they have 'time to respond', which is a well-thought out response to an stimuli.
To give an example, in the Pavlovian experiment; the learned "response" of the dogs to salivate, becomes conditioned after several repetitions; to become a "reaction" - which an instantaneous response.
It is downright crass and funny to find that the author calls people who react, as fools.
I think, the hot iron experiment should be tried on the author to find out whether he 'reacts' or 'responds' !!
From India, Delhi
Dear Hansdah,
Nice example of putting a question mark on the author's intelligence! Definitely he would react immediately if a hot iron rod is put on his body and won't like to think even for a moment to respond how to get rid of the hot iron rod from his body. The story of the author is thus quite misleading, at least for the management personnel. As management personnel, we must not be mislead by anyone. We must analyze what is good to be adopted and what is to be treated as rubbish.
Although Akbar-Birbal's witty talks are meant for children to learn lessons of wisdom, but some of those are very nice examples to be learned by even management people. May that be a fictitious story, but one such example fits well on the issues of reaction and response when emperor Akbar asked Birbal, his minister, which in his opinion could be the best weapon to be used to save a person at the time of some sudden attack on him. Birbal's pat reply was whatever tool would be available at that moment of crisis could prove as the best weapon to save himself by a person. Akbar tried a trick on Birbal to know how he could save himself from a sudden attack when he was totally unarmed. He let loose a mad elephant in the way when he did not have any weapon with him. When the mad elephant suddenly approached him, he saw a puppy near him. He immediately grabbed the small puppy of the dog and threw at the forehead of the elephant. The puppy cried with pain very loudly and the mad elephant could not bear with the immediate attack and loud burst of the puppy, turned and ran away the other side. Although a dog's puppy was not a weapon, but Birbal had to use that as a safety weapon, as nothing else was available to him to save himself. Had Birbal started responding politely to tame the mad elephant he could well have been crushed by the mad elephant. Thus, Emperor Akbar was able to know how to react at the spur of moment to save from the enemy.
PS Dhingra
Vigilance & Transformation Management Consultant
Dhingra Group of management & Educational Consultants
New Delhi
From India, Delhi
Nice example of putting a question mark on the author's intelligence! Definitely he would react immediately if a hot iron rod is put on his body and won't like to think even for a moment to respond how to get rid of the hot iron rod from his body. The story of the author is thus quite misleading, at least for the management personnel. As management personnel, we must not be mislead by anyone. We must analyze what is good to be adopted and what is to be treated as rubbish.
Although Akbar-Birbal's witty talks are meant for children to learn lessons of wisdom, but some of those are very nice examples to be learned by even management people. May that be a fictitious story, but one such example fits well on the issues of reaction and response when emperor Akbar asked Birbal, his minister, which in his opinion could be the best weapon to be used to save a person at the time of some sudden attack on him. Birbal's pat reply was whatever tool would be available at that moment of crisis could prove as the best weapon to save himself by a person. Akbar tried a trick on Birbal to know how he could save himself from a sudden attack when he was totally unarmed. He let loose a mad elephant in the way when he did not have any weapon with him. When the mad elephant suddenly approached him, he saw a puppy near him. He immediately grabbed the small puppy of the dog and threw at the forehead of the elephant. The puppy cried with pain very loudly and the mad elephant could not bear with the immediate attack and loud burst of the puppy, turned and ran away the other side. Although a dog's puppy was not a weapon, but Birbal had to use that as a safety weapon, as nothing else was available to him to save himself. Had Birbal started responding politely to tame the mad elephant he could well have been crushed by the mad elephant. Thus, Emperor Akbar was able to know how to react at the spur of moment to save from the enemy.
PS Dhingra
Vigilance & Transformation Management Consultant
Dhingra Group of management & Educational Consultants
New Delhi
From India, Delhi
Ring master in circus can respond to the lions behavior. But if those lions get free due to any reason then except the ring master every one in the spectators will panic. the reaction is a natural phenomenon to make your self active or dull to win over a situation where as responding is a learned process to make your self active or dull to win over a situation. Or we can say responding = reaction + patience . thus those who react means they are facing it for the first times and those who respond means they have already experienced that or similar situations. here Deepak Shinde the author was having his coffee watching all the drama. if suddenly he see a dead lizard in the base of his nearly empty coffee mug then would he had responded or reacted with vomiting or screaming or getting pale. All depends on that if he had been through this or similar situation before and had learned from it. Reacting is also a part of responding in above example the waiter reacted to the situation with patience (because, he was learned) whereas the women reacted without patience. in some situations patience cannot be used as in above example of hot iron rod because here you have a limited time to win over a situation thus here patience time is so small that it equals to panic time thus in that condition too patience is needed but it cannot be called patience because patience time is too less.
From India, Belgaum
From India, Belgaum
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
