Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Luxury Redefined
The marketing team is busy at work in this external room. They are sorting hundreds of business cards. Just watching them in this heat and dust was tiring. So I suggested that they should just get a card reader. One of them tells me “if you know someone who will give us a card reader or give us money for one, do let us know”. I thought about who might donate us a card reader. Interestingly enough, no one came to mind. Anyone interested in donating would want to donate directly to a cause. So what is the cause here?
I go back to the room inside to continue my work and realize that we have not had power for more than an hour now. That means the UPS has been drained dry. Thankfully we have received a grant for generators and that should help us work more efficiently. While everyone is excited about the generator, we wonder how best to use the generator. We all agree that the generator cannot be used for “luxury”. So we set out to define luxury. Is fan a luxury? How about when its 35 degrees Celsius and the asbestos roof makes the rooms hot enough to bake cookies in?
I think about “luxury” as opposed to “need”. I recollect a discussion I was having with someone from Netherlands, early last winter. He was explaining to me that he would never be able to get people from a place like Netherlands to fund sweaters for children in a country like India. Someone from Netherlands can never really find India cold, so would not consider sweaters a “need” here. While I always knew that the definition of “need” and “luxury” is subjective, I always thought that it was mostly obvious. For the first time, things are not obvious any more.
I have heard the term “luxury redefined” used many times . The visual images associated with the term are usually that of opulence and elegance. But here is a radically different image. It’s that of filtered water jumping from the “need” to the “luxury” list. That’s “luxury redefined” for me!
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Snakes and Ladders
Here, at Parikrma, I have been asked to get a School Management Software in place. Most people I mention this to, wonder "There must be tons of school software out there. Why doesn't Parikrma use what is already available?" That's what I thought two months ago. I was urged not to look at Parikrma as just a school, but to really understand the concept of Circle of Life. It has taken me a while to understand this model. I use a metaphor to explain it – "Snakes and Ladders".
Children often have some goal in mind - "I want to become an astronaut", "I want to be a teacher" etc. Look at a child working towards her goal as working through a board of Snakes and Ladders. Teachers at Parikrma erect several "Ladders" for this child to help her get to her goal. These "Ladders" come in the form of curricular and co-curricular education. While she navigates through the board with the help of ladders, she faces several "Snakes" that debilitate her and pose severe risks to her achievements.
In the case of children at Parikrma, these "Snakes" are numerous and deadly.
- The lack of financial means to education. Parikrma handles this by looking to donors and volunteers for help
- The lack of stability at home. This has several implications on a child. These manifest as behavioral and psychological issues. Children are closely monitored for any signs of trouble.
- There are the secondary implications of the kind of home environment of these children. Privileged children get enjoy not just a stable environment at home, but also get their role models, the necessary exposure and the occasional additional tutoring help. In the case of Parikrma children, lack of exposure and additional help is another "Snake" to deal with.
If we continue with this metaphor of "Snakes and Ladders", then we can notice that most schools erect "Ladders". But not many deal with "Snakes" and certainly not to the extent that Parikrma does. At Parikrma, handling these "Snakes" is as much a priority as putting up all the "Ladders". The close examination of the lives of these children, more often than not, reveals one or more of these "Snakes" that pose serious risks to their education. This starts the multi-team effort of risk-mitigation. This could take several attempts and several years. Eventually, by mitigating these risks, Parikrma hopes that the children will be able to better imbibe the education imparted in class.
"Ladders" are easy to understand.
- Create lesson plans & track lesson plan delivery in class
- Track teachers and students attendance and students grades
- Create several reports – reports on students of a teacher, reports on a student, reports on trends in the whole school
The "Snakes" introduce complex requirements
- Maintaining medical / dental / mental records of a child, including all intervention details
- Maintaining behavioral records
- Monitoring the home environment of each child. Capturing details of a family like income, health, living conditions and issues like alcoholism, if any
- Recording all the exposure and extra-curricular achievements of a child so that she can be handed her "file" as she steps out into the world from Parikrma
- Reports for donors
- Recording the qualifications and availability of a volunteer, so that remedial classes can be planned
This is what the Circle of Life is. It's more than just class rooms and play grounds. It's everything from ensuring a child is not hungry in class to trying to improve the environment at home so that the child is sent to school in a happy state of mind each morning. And the school software needs to aid in all of these activities.
These complex requirements are met with an additional non functional requirement of simplicity. The users of this software are expected to be teachers. Teachers are kept quite busy by all the children in class. They barely have time to learn several new systems and do complex data entry. Hence getting bits and pieces of the software will complex things by requiring teachers to learn too many different kinds of systems.Building a software poses its own problem. Since most work we get is pro bono, development is really slowly. That means that the builders are not necessarily around for enhancements and maintenance.
So I am thinking, open source custom solution. So now I am on a quest to find someone who can build the first version. It will be interesting to see if this approach will work for Parikrma
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
The I-Feel-Guilty Box

As the marketing team at Parikrma prepared to go out for Change your world program campaign, a box caught my attention - “The I-Feel-Guilty Box”. It reminded me of a conversation I had had with one of our donors, back in the day when I was at Yahoo! raising funds for YEFI. “I donate to ease my guilt”, said the donor. At that time I did not think much of it. Looking at this box made me realize that the Guilt-riddance angle is perhaps more common than I earlier imagined.
But what is giving rise to this guilt? My friend at Yahoo explained that it was the hefty salary we enjoy. But is that it? A closer examination of my life helped me identify a possible explanation. My conclusion is that it’s too hefty too soon.
It was not too long ago that my parents took me to Shanti Sagar, as part of our Sunday outing. Eating out even once a week considered rather extravagant in our social circles. Starters and desserts were reserved only for very special occasions like birthdays. New clothes were reserved for birthdays or Diwalis – we had to pick one occasion each year. And here I am, using terms like “retail therapy” and “Beaujolais” in everyday conversation – terms my parents would deem expensive just to teach to us.
My life has changed. The change stares at my face everytime I watch my mother buy peas from the vendor under the flyover because it’s is Rs.2 cheaper than the vendor closer to home. The change is drastic and our parents are constant reminders of where we come from. I can imagine change, so dramatic, perhaps fostering guilt.
I do not see evidence of such change when I observe my mother and her mother. So is such change between generations unique to our generation? If yes, would the guilt disappear in years to come? If the guilt disappeared, then would “The I-feel-guilty box” remain empty?

There is another box that the marketing team uses. It’s “The I-Want-Real-Change Box”. The Parikrma team has been telling me that while fewer people perhaps use the I-Want-Real-Change, the use the I-feel-guilty box might not be sustainable. I now get why they spend so much energy on getting donors to understand how Parikrma brings about real change in the lives of these children. It’s not just about getting donations. It’s about the donor getting it, really getting it!