2007-01-30

Peter's Principle

I love this drama. Bal Thackeray has made some caustic remarks about the President of India. Everybody and his uncle is now into critisizing Thackeray for making such remarks about the President.

I want to ask, what has Dr. Abdul Kalam done since he became the President, which the previous Presidents have or have not done? He is a classic case of a very good scientist being promoted to become a bad President (read 'level of incompetence').

PS:

(1)Peter's Principle - "In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence."

(2) I have read the constitution of India. If there were no powers with the President, then what was the point in becoming the President. Of course, other than wanting to retire as the President of India than as a Scientist.

3 comments:

Vivek said...

May be you have simplified the job of president very much..:)

Just wanted to make the point that president has taken right stand many number of times (whether his views were accepted or not is different subject)...one such instance was probable imposition of president's rule in one of the states which he asked govt. to review again...(which resulted in govt. deciding against president's rule)...this would not have been possible had we had any of previous presidents.
Similarly he returned poll reforms ordinance for review once....

So may be he is not that bad a president as you are making him out to be...

Have a look at following two when you get time...

http://presidentofindia.nic.in/
http://abdulkalam.blogspot.com/

Mukesh said...

Hi,
Kalam has always been an excellent President. (only if we know the powers of the president).
Some reasons:
1) Office of profit bill:
When the parliment resubmitted the bill after the rejected it initally, the president had only two choices to approve it or to put it on hold indefinetely as Zail singh did. But kalam called on the PM and again asked him to add some changes and them approved it.
2) He is equally approachable to both the ruling and the opposition parties. How many presidents have been so??
3) Imposing president's rule in Bihar was a mistake and he has dealt with it in a highly respectable manner
4) Anyone can write to the president and can surely expect him to reply
5) He was one of the presidents to vote in a general election and take a stand as a citizen.
6) When many death sentences were asked to be repelled. He did what any person with a conscience wud do.

He has been the most people friendly president we have seen and he connects to everyone.

Kiran said...

I guess a simplistic analysis of other's job in itself has something to do with incompetence - pardon me, if I was curt there.

I am not going to delve into politics, but the impact this President had on the children of India (he interacts with hundreds of them on a daily basis) is itself humungous, and when put in perspective with the other Presidents, guess he is a superior president as much as he is a great scientist.

2007-01-30

Peter's Principle

I love this drama. Bal Thackeray has made some caustic remarks about the President of India. Everybody and his uncle is now into critisizing Thackeray for making such remarks about the President.

I want to ask, what has Dr. Abdul Kalam done since he became the President, which the previous Presidents have or have not done? He is a classic case of a very good scientist being promoted to become a bad President (read 'level of incompetence').

PS:

(1)Peter's Principle - "In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence."

(2) I have read the constitution of India. If there were no powers with the President, then what was the point in becoming the President. Of course, other than wanting to retire as the President of India than as a Scientist.

3 comments:

Vivek said...

May be you have simplified the job of president very much..:)

Just wanted to make the point that president has taken right stand many number of times (whether his views were accepted or not is different subject)...one such instance was probable imposition of president's rule in one of the states which he asked govt. to review again...(which resulted in govt. deciding against president's rule)...this would not have been possible had we had any of previous presidents.
Similarly he returned poll reforms ordinance for review once....

So may be he is not that bad a president as you are making him out to be...

Have a look at following two when you get time...

http://presidentofindia.nic.in/
http://abdulkalam.blogspot.com/

Mukesh said...

Hi,
Kalam has always been an excellent President. (only if we know the powers of the president).
Some reasons:
1) Office of profit bill:
When the parliment resubmitted the bill after the rejected it initally, the president had only two choices to approve it or to put it on hold indefinetely as Zail singh did. But kalam called on the PM and again asked him to add some changes and them approved it.
2) He is equally approachable to both the ruling and the opposition parties. How many presidents have been so??
3) Imposing president's rule in Bihar was a mistake and he has dealt with it in a highly respectable manner
4) Anyone can write to the president and can surely expect him to reply
5) He was one of the presidents to vote in a general election and take a stand as a citizen.
6) When many death sentences were asked to be repelled. He did what any person with a conscience wud do.

He has been the most people friendly president we have seen and he connects to everyone.

Kiran said...

I guess a simplistic analysis of other's job in itself has something to do with incompetence - pardon me, if I was curt there.

I am not going to delve into politics, but the impact this President had on the children of India (he interacts with hundreds of them on a daily basis) is itself humungous, and when put in perspective with the other Presidents, guess he is a superior president as much as he is a great scientist.