Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

A business should be like a well-oiled machine, with all the cogs and gears cohesively working together towards a desired outcome. All parts are integral to the success of the company. As with any engine, problems arise through internal and external influences. These should be dealt with quickly and efficiently in order to keep moving full steam ahead. But, if a company is dealing with a high-level of power distance, the engine could stall completely. <a href="https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://en.wikipedia.org/&amp;httpsredir=1&amp;article=1014&amp;context=orpc">The power distance index</a>, <keyword id="693690" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="PDI">PDI</keyword>, deals with the unequal distribution of power in a society or organization, and to what extent the less powerful people accept and expect these circumstances. Each nation is ranked according to their PDI. The <a href="http://booksite.mkp.com/barnum/testingessentials/pdfs/06_Going_Local_in_India.pdf">world average has a PDI score of 56.5</a>. India’s score is 77 PDI. Being that India is an emerging superpower and economic powerhouse, this undeniably high PDI can be problematic for corporations. A high PDI in a company setting can create not only a difficult and unfair working environment, it can also cause lulls in productivity, as employees are uncomfortable providing objective feedback to company heads. It can affect employees’ decision-making processes, in that they require a manager to constantly tell them what to do. A high PDI in a business setting can potentially turn employees into “yes-men/women,” by agreeing to tasks without fully analyzing all the requirements that go into them. So, when a task is unable to be completed or is poorly executed, they are afraid to be honest about their failures. A high PDI from a managerial perspective can be an even worse ordeal. In a high PDI setting, bosses can act more like chauvinistic dictators. They can have a deep-seated superiority complex and believe they are incapable of error as they preside over their corporation from an ivory tower. They expect employees to bend to their every whim. They fail to take responsibility for their own errors, mostly because they believe they are incapable of making them. This results in employees being blamed for a manager’s incompetence. From either end of the spectrum, managerial or employee, a high PDI within a company is a recipe for disaster. While a low PDI creates ideal and high-productivity work environments. For example, <a href="http://indiathink.com/power-distance/">the Dutch are known for effective communication and an egalitarian managerial style</a>, where employees are given access to all levels of management. India is accustomed to a much different model. Currently, India is an E-commerce and technology investment hotbed. Investors are eager to jump on board but may not realize all the complications that go into a working with a high PDI. <a href="http://indiathink.com/power-distance/">Technology companies</a> and digitally native brands also tend to have a flat-management style which thrives in a low PDI environment. So how do they bridge the gap? <a href="http://www.quantifiedcommerce.com/">Quantified Commerce</a> is a vertically-integrated company of world-class talented individuals who manoeuvre around the ingrained struggles that come with power distance. <keyword id="6504806" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Agam-Berry">Agam Berry</keyword>, the founder of <a href="https://twitter.com/QuantifiedC">Quantified Commerce</a>, knows what it means to deal with the power distance with Indian employees. “People afraid of being honest with execs in a flat management style,” he says. “Bypassing power distance in India can be difficult, but our company encourages people to have a voice.” <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/quantifiedcommerce/">Quantified Commerce</a> is a rapidly-growing vertically-integrated company (100-300% growth per year over the last five years), that uses an egalitarian approach when it comes to managing its Indian employees. “We push them to speak up and be held accountable for their actions. The execs hold everyone to the same standard that they hold themselves, “We made speaking up and having backbone one of the core values so that people feel confident bringing up issues to their supervisors and we are constantly trying to drill that in,” says <keyword id="41529" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Berry">Berry</keyword>. “We will always make mistakes, as any company does, but they will be a lot easier to fix if everyone just speaks up and points them out.”<a href="https://www.instagram.com/quantifiedcommerce/">Quantified Commerce</a> focuses on open communication and continuous education within a constantly changing digital environment.” “Everyday, our Indian employees go through 1-2 hours of education,” Berry says. “Keeping them up to date not only with constant tech advancements, but training them in our workplace culture, is of vital importance to our company.” Because of the <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/quantifiedcommerce/">Quantified Commerce’s</a> commitment to the continuous development of its employees, the company develops in a positive direction as well. High PDI may take a lot of work to overcome, but the end goal of creating a cohesive and well-run digital company is worth it. It’s important to encourage employees and upper-level executives to all be held accountable for their actions. All employees should feel like the have a voice in their company since everyone’s role is crucial to the company’s continued success.

‘Bypassing power distance in India’- Agam Berry, Quantified Commerce

Mumbai, Mar 27 () In view of hardship faced by outbreak of COVID-19, the Reserve Bank of India on Friday extended the deadline for meeting last tranche of capital conservation buffer (CCB) by another six months. The move would leave about Rs 35,000 crore capital in the hands of banks for lending to on-lending to productive sectors of the economy. This would help banks increase lending by over Rs 3.5 lakh crore by leveraging ten times of the capital. "Considering the potential stress on account of COVID-19, it has been decided to further defer the implementation of the last tranche of 0.625 per cent of the CCB from March 31 to September 30, 2020," RBI Governor Shaktikanta Das said while unveiling a slew of measures to fight the impact of the pandemic on the economy. Currently, the CCB of banks stands at 1.875 per cent of the core capital. Sharing the decisions of RBI's seventh bi-monthly monetary policy review, the governor said the CCB is designed to ensure that banks build up capital buffers during normal times, that are outside periods of stress which can be drawn down, as losses are incurred during a stressed period. As per Basel standards, the CCB was to be implemented in tranches of 0.625 per cent and the transition to full CCB of 2.5 per cent was set to be completed by March 31, 2019. It was introduced after the 2008 global financial crisis to improve the ability of banks to withstand adverse economic conditions. It was one of the sore points between RBI and the government during 2018. Following the change of guard at the central bank, it was decided to defer it by a year till March 2020. "Consequently, the pre-specified trigger for loss absorption through conversion/write-down of Additional Tier 1 instruments (PNCPS and PDI) shall remain at 5.5 per cent of risk-weighted assets (RWAs) and will rise to 6.125 per cent of RWAs on September 30, 2020," he said. Besides, it was also decided to defer the implementation of Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR). The NSFR, which reduces funding risk by requiring banks to fund their activities with sufficiently stable sources of funding over a time horizon of a year in order to mitigate the risk of future funding stress, was required to be introduced by banks from April 1, 2020. "It has now been decided to defer the implementation of NSFR by six months to October 1, 2020," Das said. DP SHW ANSANS

RBI extends deadline for meeting last tranche of capital conservation buffer by 6 mths

<ul class="summary-list"><li>US defense officials are increasingly warning of the potential for conflict with <keyword id="1334" type="COUNTRY" weightage="60" keywordseo="China">China</keyword> over <keyword id="46274" type="COUNTRY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Taiwan">Taiwan</keyword>.</li><li>There is almost no way in which the US could intervene in that conflict without devastating losses.</li></ul>Many of America's leading military and political figures have issued increasingly alarmist warnings in recent days about the potential for conflict with China, especially related to issues surrounding Taiwan.But before the US gets into a crisis that brings it to the threshold of war - or finds itself stumbling into one - policymakers and military leaders need to address some hard realities.There is almost no scenario in which the United States can successfully intervene in a war between China and Taiwan that will not leave our country in far worse shape than it is right now; in a worst-case scenario, American territory could be struck by nuclear missiles.In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Adm. Phil Davidson, commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific, warned that Chinese military developments looked to him like a nation <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-losing-military-edge-in-asia-as-china-looks-like-planning-for-war-admiral?utm_source=Sailthru&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=EBB%2003.11.21&amp;utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Early%20Bird%20BriefBird%20Brief">planning for a war</a>.Davidson added that he believed China would attempt to <a href="https://news.usni.org/2021/03/09/davidson-china-could-try-to-take-control-of-taiwan-in-next-six-years">forcibly reunify</a> Taiwan "in the next six years." To guard against this possibility, Davidson asked Congress to provide a whopping $27 billion in additional funding over the current defense budget.<div type="image" title="Navy destroyer Barry Taiwan Strait" height="952" width="1431" msid="81572464" hostid="261"></div>One of the featured programs for this increase is the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. Last year Congress allocated $2.1 billion for the initiative. This year Davidson is asking for more than double that amount, to <a href="https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2021/03/05/indopacom-head-defends-pacific-fund-pricetag/">$4.6 billion</a>.The PDI's main objectives will be to <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39610/this-is-the-pentagons-27-billion-master-plan-to-deter-china-in-the-pacific">increase the number</a> of ground-based cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and hypersonic missiles in areas closer to Chinese territory. That effort is already well underway.In October the US Marine Corps completed construction on its first new permanent base in the Indo-Pacific area <a href="https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/2367980/marine-corps-activates-camp-blaz-in-guam/">since 1952</a>. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force have additional plans to establish new bases or expand existing ones at Tinian Island, Palau, Guam, and Australia - all along the so-called "first island chain" near China's coastline.The expansion is designed to enhance US' ability to conduct "<a href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/12/22/how-air-force-will-expand-its-pacific-island-hopping-campaign-2021.html">island-hopping</a>" operations and create the ability to rapidly <a href="https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/11/12/air-bases-are-at-risk-without-the-agile-combat-employment-approach/">construct military airfields</a> in austere environments.The reason for this expansion, Davidson said, was to reduce or eliminate the time necessary for American military forces to engage Chinese targets.<div type="image" title="F-15E Strike Eagles and a B-2 Spirit bomber fly in formation over Andersen Air Force Base on Guam" height="591" width="1088" msid="81572465" hostid="261"></div>The admiral said that right now it would take US forces on the West Coast more than three weeks to get within range of China and troops from Alaska 17 days. But the "perfect speed," <a href="https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/21-03-09-united-states-indo-pacific-command">Davidson concluded</a>, was "being there."Almost entirely absent from the hearing was any explanation of what's driving the United States to elevate the risk of war by increasing the number of troops near the Chinese coast.As a freedom-loving democracy, the United States is a strong advocate for the independence and freedom of any people, including those in Taiwan. But to that laudable belief must be added a willingness to assess the world in a realistic way.Right now, both the United States and China are in a spiral in which one side expands its capabilities for war, citing rising threats from the other - which each then offers as justification for yet more military spending and preparation for war.China is building infrastructure to project its power westward to the first island chain at the same time US forces are moving infrastructure eastward toward the first island chain and Chinese coast. Every day increases the chance of an accident or miscalculation leading to war.<div type="image" title="Taiwan military exercise invasion artillery Han Kuang" height="933" width="1400" msid="81572467" hostid="261"></div>Both the <a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/02/08/asia-pacific/politics-diplomacy-asia-pacific/biden-xi-china-us/">United States</a> and <a href="https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/again-china-doesnt-want-war-with-the-us/">China</a> say they don't want war, but both sides are accelerating and expanding their preparation for war.If the United States were to one day fight China for anything other than an unprovoked attack, we would be choosing a course which would - in the best-case scenario - cause extraordinary harm to our military and markedly degrade our national security; in the worst-case, we could <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/07/china-us-war/594793/">lose a war</a>, putting at risk our very freedom.It is crucial to understand that for China, the Taiwan issue is not merely a <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/china-flags-taiwan-as-core-issue-asks-us-to-fix-trump-admin-mistakes-121020601127_1.html">core interest</a>, but an <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/05/china-really-isnt-joking-about-taiwan/">emotionally charged</a> one. They are far more willing to pay extraordinary costs, sacrifice many men, and could risk it all to eventually compel unification with Taiwan. The issue does not directly affect our national security unless we get involved.If we eventually choose war with China over Taiwan, we will at best suffer egregious losses in ships, aircraft, and troops; in a worst-case, the war could deteriorate into a nuclear exchange in which American cities are turned into nuclear wastelands, killing millions.America should never take such risks unless our security and freedom are directly threatened. Fighting China for any reason short of that would be a foolish gamble of the highest order.Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow for <keyword id="9131314" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="defense-priorities">Defense Priorities</keyword> and a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08KHGDQRK">The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America</a>." Follow him @DanielLDavis1.

US officials who are ready to fight China over Taiwan don't understand how much is at stake

The first issue of Turkey's largest opposition newspaper, Zaman, was released Sunday since&#xa0;<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/todays-zaman-turkey-police-2016-3">it was seized by the government</a> in a midnight&#xa0;Saturday raid. It was met with widespread condemnation.As many noted on Twitter, the paper's front page appeared to have transformed overnight into a "<a href="https://twitter.com/bkenes/status/706311149726388224">propaganda machine</a>" for the regime. It mentioned nothing about the raid on Zaman's headquarters the night before and featured&#xa0;headlines praising the government's work on a new bridge and its strengthening&#xa0;business ties with Iran.Here is the cover:&#xa0;<div></div>The last "free" issue of Zaman was released the day before it was seized. The headline read,&#xa0;"Constitution suspended," above an excerpt from Turkey's constitution that&#xa0;forbids seizure of printing houses and press equipment:<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"></div></div></div>Many of Zaman's journalists were preparing for the raid after <a href="http://www.todayszaman.com/national_turkish-police-raid-zaman-hqs-fire-tear-gas-on-readers-after-govt-takeover_414040.html">a</a><a href="http://www.todayszaman.com/national_turkish-police-raid-zaman-hqs-fire-tear-gas-on-readers-after-govt-takeover_414040.html">&#xa0;court ordered</a> that the paper be confiscated for allegedly acting as a mouthpiece for&#xa0;the "Fethullahist Terrorist Organization/Parallel State Structure (FETÖ/PDY)."The "parallel state structure" is what Turkish President Recep Erdogan calls the&#xa0;Gülen movement -&#xa0;a social movement led by the Turkish scholar and preacher Fethullah Gülen that is openly critical of Erdogan's government.It is not the first time Zaman has been targeted. Zaman's then-editor in chief,&#xa0;Ekrem Dumanli,&#xa0;<a href="http://www.todayszaman.com/national_court-rules-for-release-of-zaman-chief-editor-samanyolu-manager-arrested_367441.html">was arrested</a> in December 2014 on charges of forming and leading a terrorist organization. He he was released five days later.Sevgi Akarcesme, editor-in-chief of Zaman's English-language counterpart Today's Zaman, was <a href="http://www.todayszaman.com/national_todays-zaman-journalists-sued-over-replies-to-their-twitter-posts_399121.html" target="_blank" data-rapid_p="9">put on trial</a>&#xa0;in August after Prime Minister Ahmet&#xa0;Davutoglu, a member of the ruling AKP party, sued her for "insulting" him on Twitter.&#xa0;Akarcesme had tweeted that "Davutoglu, the prime minister of the government that covered up the corruption investigation, has eliminated press freedom in Turkey."Zaman's&#xa0;management and editorial boards have been&#xa0;replaced by a three-member board&#xa0;consisting of pro-government "trustees." The paper's current editor-in-chief,&#xa0;Abdülhamit Bilici, <a href="https://twitter.com/ahamitbilici/status/706234686352334848?lang=en">had his contract voided</a> by the trustees.<a href="https://twitter.com/USEmbassyTurkey/status/706022333325164544">In a statement</a>, US State Department spokesman John Kirby called the takeover "troubling." <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-apple-fbi-hack-iphone-san-bernardino-shooing-2016-2">Tim Cook: Apple won't hack iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooter</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="V3b2MxMTE65zuW9Z2NE6WgtWFPrwrXbd" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

See how a Turkish newspaper transformed into a government 'propaganda machine' overnight

<div class="image-container float_right" style="width:480px"><div class="image"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&amp;v=LvbyAcYjzlc">via TrackingPoint</a></div></div>IN 1953 Gardner Heidrick and John Struggles left the management consultancy for which they worked, to found a new company which would focus on recruiting corporate bosses. It was the first of what would become the big five executive-search (or "headhunting") firms, and has been a leader in the recruitment industry for 60 years. The firm's placement of Eric Schmidt as the head of the then-upstart Google in 2001 is regarded as a signature success: he stayed in the position for a decade, and still serves as the company's executive chairman.
Today Heidrick &amp; Struggles is, well, struggling. Its revenues fell from $616m in 2008 to $444m last year, and over the past year its profit margin has been 3.4%--piddling by the industry's standards. In July its boss, Kevin Kelly, stepped down after its board said it was considering "strategic alternatives", including a sale.
Heidrick &amp; Struggles's strong position in recruiting for financial firms left it vulnerable after the 2007-08 crisis. It compounded its woes by overreacting, cutting staff drastically and failing to pay its best recruiters competitively. That opened the door for rival firms to raid its talent. The market has recovered since, but the firm still has 25% fewer consultants than at the end of 2008. Mr Kelly sought to rebuild the business by offering "leadership" advice to senior managers, but these efforts are still at an early stage.
Like other headhunters the firm is also suffering at the top and bottom end of the recruitment market. At the lower end, employers seeking managers can now call up a huge database of potential candidates using <keyword id="28120" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Linkedin">LinkedIn</keyword>, a professional-networking website, allowing them to cut out the middleman. And when it comes to filling the most senior jobs, although globalisation is increasing the size of the potential market, clients have begun to rebel against the fat fees charged by the largest executive-search firms: a third of the first-year salary for the position, plus a further "administrative fee". Both are charged even if a suitable candidate is not found.
Some users of headhunters have also taken umbrage at their "off-limits" clauses, in which they promise existing clients that they will not poach staff from them. That keeps many of the best candidates off new clients' shortlists. And they question the value they get for their money: an internal review by Heidrick &amp; Struggles in 2009 found that 40% of the people it placed in jobs left within 18 months.
As a result, many employers are now doing their own searches for new bosses. A recent survey by HSZ Media, which studies the recruitment industry, found that in-house recruiting has increased by a quarter over the past five years. Scott Scanlon, HSZ's managing director, estimates that this trend is costing headhunting firms $650m a year. In 2003 Time Warner, a media conglomerate, set up an in-house search group, which now includes 30 recruiters across three continents. "It's a business within a business, which could be competitive with any of the big outside firms," says Maggie Rubey Lynch, its director. She says the team hires better people in less time than before, and estimates that it has so far saved the company $100m.
Most big headhunters have responded to this threat by investing in new capabilities. Korn/Ferry has gone on an acquisition spree. After buying PDI Ninth House, a leadership consultancy, it now derives 40% of its revenue from non-search sources, including assessments of managers and succession planning.
Russell Reynolds is concentrating on the growing need for technology staff among non-IT companies. Spencer Stuart is focusing on energy firms. And Zurich-based Egon Zehnder, the only member of the big five whose headquarters is outside America, has sought to build up its presence in emerging markets. Damien O'Brien, its boss, says he expects those regions to account for a third of revenues within five years--though he admits that Chinese employers tend to resist the high-end fee structure, in which the firm is paid even if a job is not filled.
The strategy of Heidrick &amp; Struggles, in contrast, will remain unclear until it completes its own hunt for a new head. The board now says it intends to keep the company independent after all. Nevertheless, Mr Scanlon thinks it would be better for it to sell itself to a foreign buyer. He cites Recruit Holdings, a big Japanese human-resources firm seeking to expand in North America, as a "perfect matchup". And with its shares 70% below their 2007 high, "Heidrick is a very affordable company."
Click <a href="https://subscriptions.economist.com/nwcd">here</a> to subscribe to <keyword id="425741" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="The-Economist">The Economist</keyword>

You Searched For "PDI" and got 5 results

‘Bypassing power distance in India’- Agam Berry, Quantified Commerce

Sponsored Post

RBI extends deadline for meeting last tranche of capital conservation buffer by 6 mths

PTI

US officials who are ready to fight China over Taiwan don't understand how much is at stake

Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis, ret…

See how a Turkish newspaper transformed into a government 'propaganda machine' overnight

Natasha Bertrand

Times Are Tough For Some Executive Headhunters

The Economist

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides