108 அறத்துப்பால் - இல்லறவியல் - செய்ந்நன்றி அறிதல்

நன்றி மறப்பது நன்றன்று நன்றல்லது
அன்றே மறப்பது நன்று.

ஒருவர் நமக்கு நல்லது செய்தால் அதை என்றும் மறக்க கூடாது. அதுவே ஒருவர் செய்த கெடுதலை உடனே மறப்பது நமக்கு நல்லது.

This kural comes under the section which talks about gratitude. In my opinion, Valluvar is talking about how there are no circumstances when it is acceptable to cancel a debt of gratitude for something good that somebody has done to you. In this specific kural, he says you should never forget anything good or beneficial that was done to you by somebody. On the other hand, if somebody has harmed you, it is best to forget it instantly as it serves no purpose to hold grudges.

In context, this message is even more powerful as in the next couplet, he says even a grievous harm (to the extent of murder) is trumped by a prior good deed a person has done to you. Essentially, a debt of gratitude is for ever. No subsequent bad deed cancels it. Perhaps only another good deed you do to them can balance the accounts?

My experiments with pricing

I participated in the IIMB Alumni art show, Niram on the 30^th of April, 2012. The event was held as an adjunct to the annual convocation function. The exhibition was organized well but in my opinion, there was no clarity on who the intended audience were both on the part of the participants and on the part of the organizers. The graduating students were, understandably, more interested in enjoying the last few hours with their friends and in indulging the nostalgia coursing through the very buildings. The other major intended targets, the parents and significant others of the graduating students, did not arrive until 4:30. Even then, their hearts brimming with pride, they were focused on ensuring that they get a good seat to view their graduating offspring or friends and not viewing some art exhibition. At best it was a distraction and at worst, it was an impediment. Existing students and professors, stayed well way from all this highfalutin (sic) nonsense! I am not too sure that the show is commercially viable unless it focuses on servicing the nostalgia and pride.

That, partially, may explain the relative success I had in selling my photographs. I had put up about 30 standard sized images, printed on textured paper and unframed. As an experiment, I had decided that people could pay whatever they felt the photographs were worth, no questions asked, to buy it. The motivation for this was that the available marketing literature indicates that in most situations where this Pay-what-you-want (PWYW) method was adopted, the yield was higher than what they would have got if they had set a price dictated by micro economics.

I felt that Niram was a good place to try this admittedly uncontrolled experiment as there were other people exhibiting photographs to prime the price in the minds of the target audience and due to the nature of the occasion, a homogenous set of customers could be expected. (There was a surprise in this assumption, as you will see!) I felt fairly confident that I would be able to replicate the results that other PWYW experiments had indicated.

First, let me put you out of your misery and give the statistics. I will later try and explain what I saw from my limited knowledge of the processes that could have been at work.

The good news is that I sold 11 prints out of the 30. The not-so-good news is that I only got about 5000 rupees for the lot, representing an average of Rs. 450 per print. The lowest price was Rs. 30 and the highest was Rs. 1000. My prior experience had pegged the price at around Rs. 1000 for similar prints. My own expectation, from reading the literature, was an average of around 1250 or 1500.

I also was privileged to observe some interesting behaviour:

Most people were flummoxed by the idea. The struggle to be fair versus not overpaying was palpable. Each assumed a bargaining mode and hesitantly offered a price, expecting to be either rebuffed or to hear a counter offer. The arena of a fixed, customer determined price was completely new with no prior cues for behavior. Frankly, it was a new experience for me too. It was heartening to note that the start point was clearly an attempt to be fair and necessarily low because they expected it to devolve into a more familiar ‘bargain’ situation. Since I accepted whatever was offered, the price point, I believe, dipped. With education with the model, I am certain that it would be higher. Whether it would be higher than my ‘fair price’ is still open. (It would be an interesting exercise to get into an implied bargaining if the artist were to point out nuances of the work after the price is offered. Or before!)

While the number of copies sold were too low to draw any conclusions, most prints were purchased for gifting. At least one was sold for spot gifting. Therefore budget aspects may have also affected the price decision as opposed to a pure ‘value’ driven price.

The counter point was unintentionally provided by a couple staff of IIMB. They first thought it was a prank when they saw the PWYW sign. On being assured that it was indeed intentional, they thought it is an auction where they had to enter a bid for a print (I had a visitors log which may have prompted this thought.) and at the end of the day, the highest bid for a print will get it. (On second thoughts, this may be a very interesting way to structure this for non-perishable, non consumable goods). When it was clarified that they could indeed pay whatever they, it devolved into pure greed. One person started pointing out four or five prints and said he wanted to buy them for Rs 50 each. Another person pointed to a specific print and unbelievingly offered Rs 30. In a spirit of further experimentation, I limited the deal to one print each. Interestingly the first person chose a print that was not in his original list but did not change the price. To assure them that I will give the two prints for the price offered, I put the magic ‘Sold’ sticker on the prints and they went away very happy. I made it a point to tell them that they should not divulge what they paid to other staff.

Couple of observations on this entire transaction: (a) the first person did not amend his offer even after hearing his friend’s lower offer being accepted. (b) When this 15 minute drama was being played out, another person among the spectators informed them that such prints normally cost about Rs. 150. This information was assimilated but the offer did not change.

The after effect of this transaction was equally interesting. The first person brought along another colleague and told me “She did not believe me when I told her that there was this … person who was giving away prints at throwaway prices. So I brought her along.” (I distinctly got the impression that only decency considerations prevented him from using the word ‘fool’ instead of ‘person’!) They spent about 10-15 minutes to select a print. Once they made a decision I asked the purchaser what price she would offer. She said “Rs. 50”. I asked her if it is the price she thought the print was worth . She answered that the offer came because the other person got his print for Rs. 50. (Interestingly, she did not offer Rs. 30. Why, I don’t know!) I asked her if she knew what it cost me to print it. She said her colleague had told Rs. 100. So, I asked her if she thought it was fair to offer me 50 after knowing that I will make a loss. She blushed and both of them went away. None of the other staff came after that. I don’t know what to make of this and I wouldn’t dare to draw any conclusions but the price points still showed a twisted kind of fairness, in my opinion.

One of the other exhibitors made me the subject of his own experiment. He picked a print and said “No other person can evaluate an art’s worth. So, I will offer you one of my own works in barter.” When I said OK, he took a print and walked across to his stall and gave me two of his pieces, each priced at about Rs. 200. Interestingly he neither offered to let me choose nor did he give me his best or median works. I believe what he gave me was slightly above the lowest priced items in his stock. I think he basically gave whatever was cheapest to make for him. So, I infer that he valued it about Rs. 100. The approach was interesting.

The entire day was exceedingly interesting and enriching for all these experiences. I am intrigued by this gross difference in expectation and actuality. While it is impossible to conclude with any certainty without controlled experiments, I offer below my thoughts on the various factors influencing the price point.

In my opinion, and I need to verify this, a PWYW would only work for experience goods. Pricing for art in general and photos in particular, depend on factors which even experts find difficult to articulate. My expectation was that in the case of such credence goods, customers would start at a price higher than the market price due to uncertainly and fairness considerations.

Obviously, customers are cannier than that! Either that or they started a point lower than their budget to allow negotiation room, in case of people who were buying it as a gift. Impulse purchasers went from a base of their assessment of component costs and a reasonable margin, I think. The price of similar goods in the show had no effect on these prices as those pieces never entered their consideration set for a gift purchase due to their high cost. After the experience, I don’t think having to make the offer publicly has much impact on the price.

Essentially, I think for credence goods since they have no reference pricing mechanisms; they reached for the closest reasonable reference point in their experience.

I am also wondering what effect the standardized sizes had. I wonder if I had varying sizes of the prints customers would have risked a higher per unit price on a smaller print since they are not experienced in either the model or in art prices in general.

The behavior of the staff was the most interesting of all, in my opinion. I honestly think that they were of the opinion that I was a fool and should soon be parted from my money. There was a kind of fairness in their offers, a sort of internal consistency. I am struggling to explain it in any other terms. I am not sure it is actually culturally driven; more like the scent of a good deal blinding them to all other considerations. I have been there myself – purchased useless, expensive stuff because of the excellent deal. Saying it is ‘culture’ is, I think, being lazy.

In summary, if I had priced the prints at the Rs 1000 that experience indicates is the correct price, I think would have made the same money; may be I would even sold the same number of prints. It would have certainly been more familiar ground for my customers! On the whole, it was a very interesting experience!

What Makes Art?

Ok. The title is to catch attention. I cannot answer that question. Cannot even attempt to. Being fairly artless, and somewhat down to earth, this is one of those questions I am happy to let go.

But why did this question crop up?

In the recent past, I and a friend of mine participated in Chitra Santhe – an once a year, full day street art market in Bangalore. We put up a stall to sell our photographs. To get the photographs to a level were happy to show to people and hopefully will also be able to sell, we took lot of help – from people who actually were artists and knew about photography. All said and done, we were there for a lark.

Participation itself went through a bit of twists and turns. Initially powers that be (who decide who are artists and who are not) were divided over whether to treat photography as art or not. Finally, it was decided that photography is also art. We tied up with a artist friend to get a stall.

And we had quite a bit of fun in getting the photographs to the level we thought was good enough for public display and sale. This took time, patience, imagination and expertise.

Which were certainly in short supply. Most often, the expertise of editing the photos needed a friend who is a professional photographer. Selection of photos was again another involved process. Another artist friend critiqued.

If nothing else, I learnt two phrases – ‘it is not talking to me’, ‘there is no drama’.

Each photo went through many steps – selection, a sense of what the photo should be saying, transformation of the photo to say that.

Finally, each photo had contributions from 4 people – 2 photographers, 1 artist/photographer, 1 photographer/artist.

This is when the question came up – what makes an art? Was it the photograph? Was it the thinking as to what the photo should be saying? Was it the expertise that transformed the photo?

I don’t really know. All I can say is that, many people who saw the photos in Chitra Santhe had a smile on their faces. May be that is what art is all about. To bring out the emotions in people.

I have another question – What price art? That is another story altogether.

Indians & Customer Service

Of late, all my friends and acquaintances seem to be afflicted by a strange new disease – dissatisfaction with customer service. Ten minutes into the conversation, after the traffic, infrastructure etc have been exhausted as topics, we start cribbing about bad customer service is from some poor corporation. Normally it is the cell phone company; other times, it is the credit card company. It is almost as good a conversation filler as ‘back home’ talks among the NRI crowd.

Agreed, we are all at that certain age when cantankerousness is not only expected but also very satisfying. Methinks it is our poor substitute for more lecherous pleasures, again, since we have reached that certain age where anything remotely enjoyable is either bad for you or not decorous. (When and how that age comes about is a topic for another day, hopefully. In fact it has to be explored if the age is physical, somatic or mental. But I digress …). Even granting the tetchiness, I feel that our ire at bad customer service is all out of proportion with the trigger.

Let me give you an example: earlier, say 5-6 years ago, if a plumber told he will come at 10 AM Tuesday, it was understood all around that it is merely his intention and one was quite happy if he turned up on Tuesday at all. No squabbling, no irritation, no nothing. Similarly, if the cell phone dropped a call, there was an elaborate etiquette on who should call back whom but there was no beating of the breasts or tearing of hairs. (Kids: there was a time when one was happy to get thru to somebody in another metro within an hour by using a lightning call. No kidding and one paid a real bomb too!) But now, all it takes is a surly tone from the hassled customer support kid and we go ballistic.

I think the reason for this has to be among the following causes: (a) we have lost our chalta hai attitude without developing the ability to get service, (b) we don’t really understand what is a commensurate level of service for the money we pay and (c) customer service really sucks. It would be a cop out to say that it is a mixture of all three. Sure, it is a combination of all these and more causes. However, I believe that our expectation does not match what is being offered, which, obviously, is a function of what we are willing to pay.

Management theory defines customer satisfaction as Performance minus Expectation (it says that in whole tomes but that is it, in essence). As a culture, though, we want a Rolls Royce for the price of a Maruti. So, our expectation is never tempered by what we pay for the service. Therefore even very good service does not satisfy us – only exceptional service would do! Taking the cell phone example further, the ARPU for Indian providers is among the lowest in the world (~ USD 3 per month, if I remember correctly). For that we have fairly high technology services like 3G and very interesting (even ruinous) rate plans like per second billing, location based billing, unlimited data etc. In addition to all this, we went and invented the ‘missed call’ – an absolutely brilliant but ultimately unproductive (for the carrier) communication channel.

Have a look at the ARPU data by country (slightly old but the major trends have not changed).

Indian ARPU clearly is the bottom of the pack. Ask yourself honestly – is your expectation from your provider on service quality not closer to the Japan end of the spectrum?

I hold no candle for the carriers – I am just as irritated when a call is dropped or when a standing instruction goes missing as anybody else. All I ask for is a bit of fairness in expectation.

It is not worthy of comment that the dog talks badly, it is a wonder it talks at all!

On the nature of science

A discussion on a group that I subscribe to sparked off this opinion. The discussion started with a debate on the efficacy of drinking 600ml of water to cure all kinds of diseases. Obviously it attracted a few skeptical comments and references to snopes which were countered by evidence on how "my mother's friend had this xxx disease that doctors gave up on but was cured by homeopathy/ ayurveda" etc. Broadly the arguments were split between "Where is the proof?" and "It is all individual. There is no proof required as it clearly works." spiced by "Western science is selective about proof anyway".

This got me thinking about proof and the nature of science and I thought I will dash off a quick opinion. A well reasoned article will have to wait a bit though.

Anecdotal evidence is not proof in any system of logic, including the vedic system of logic or Eastern philosophy that No-proof-is-requried camp normally subscribe to.

If I say placebo effect or natural remission or even immunity build-up as explanations for the instances that alternative medicinces seem to work, it will normally be pooh-poohed as a "Western concept" without really offering an "eastern" explanation for why it works for a class of people. If it does not work for class of people, then it is irrelevant anyway.

But the fact is that neither the explanation nor veracity of this assertion can be confirmed by either camp it is beyond the competence of both parties, specifically as it applies to medicine. So other than sophistry, it achieves nothing to enter into a debate on that.

Nobody but a novice is arrogant enough to claim that all phenomena are explained, indeed, are even explainable.. Even in so called classical physics only a small set of problems are amenable to solutions. The rest are all approximations. THerefore this myth that science has all the answers is not something that is propagated by scientists or people who understand what science is.

In my opinion, there is no western or eastern science. There are only observations & anamolies and theories that attempt to explain them. All schools of reasoning and logic require that all assumptions be clearly stated and rigour be employed in arriving at conclusions. However, all schools also demand that you subscribe to their epistemology in doing so. Euclidean geometry only works if you subscribe to the axioms, which by definition, cannot be proved. Therefore pays your money and takes choices.

The problem with making choices is this: It is interesting that all of us who rant & rave at the 'other' side nevertheless partake of the bits that are personally palatable or profitable from any system of thought. You, who are such a champion for the "Ancient Indian Tradition" "Vedic xyz", no doubt are an excellent logician in the Hellenic tradition because that is what was required for you to code. Nor are you, I am willing to bet, shy about taking a flight or using a computer or undergo a heart surgery (which hopefully you dont need) despite their western origins. I, the champion for skepticism and 'Western' rationality, have to shamefully confess that I prefer my mother's kashayam when my stomach is upset to any tablet and that I do feel a sneaking pride when I read about Aryabhatta or Bhaskara or when I hear the infamous "you invented nothing" slogan for nothing more than the accident of being born in the geographic area as these worthies. Hell, I am sure many a skeptic has sent up a prayer (inadvertenly or involuntarily, I am sure) when a loved one is very sick. So each of us assembles a quilt of biases, thought models, mental shortcuts, conditionings, world views, epistemologies, ontologies and go around thinking OUR hodge podge is better than the other's pot pourri.

We are all instrumental in our philosophy. The rest is just time-pass.

That having been said, homeopathy doesnt work!