Your reputation depends on what kind of people you are working with.

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

@Usha We are not discussing the typical behavioral disorder of some,not accepting the reality as it is but broader point of validity of conduct remaining steadfastly loyal to one's core principles.Had not Mahatma,Raja Ram Mohan Roy,Vidyasagar remained obstinate(!) to their chosen paths and goals the destiny of women of this country would have veered off to a different trajectory altogether. It was not a moral luxury for them but a necessity. How contemporaries treated them ? With stings of ridicule and heaps of insults.They shone gloriously in their majestic isolation. To cite a recent case which can open the eyes of those who wear utilitarian blinkers.All we know how Satyam Computers and its founder Raju courted disaster by only lending his soul to his majority of evil-doing ministers by completely eliminating the saner and conscientious elements!

I agree with what you say, but such people as Raja Ram Mohan Roy , Vidyasagar and others who have worked tirelessly without bothering about the insults and oppositions are very few ...For the vast majority of the people it is a matter of compromise and sycophancy if necessary to get their work done or make their positions secure. I also feel that today it is very difficult to distinguish between the really committed people and the ones that pretend to be so. I guess it is beacuse we have become so cynical with our society and people in general!

chinmoymukherjee wrote:

@Usha We are not discussing the typical behavioral disorder of some,not accepting the reality as it is but broader point of validity of conduct remaining steadfastly loyal to one's core principles.Had not Mahatma,Raja Ram Mohan Roy,Vidyasagar remained obstinate(!) to their chosen paths and goals the destiny of women of this country would have veered off to a different trajectory altogether. It was not a moral luxury for them but a necessity. How contemporaries treated them ? With stings of ridicule and heaps of insults.They shone gloriously in their majestic isolation. To cite a recent case which can open the eyes of those who wear utilitarian blinkers.All we know how Satyam Computers and its founder Raju courted disaster by only lending his soul to his majority of evil-doing ministers by completely eliminating the saner and conscientious elements!

 

Agree with your views but it is not just about one's own integrity and doing what is right no matter what. It is also about standing up against or raising voice against what is wrong and in the process many a times going against the tide. This can lead to difficult situations like being framed or being a social outcast or spoken ill of. A person's reputation can not depend on that either.At the end of the day a person is known by what he is and not what he is made out to be!

Some have given example of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a great social revolutionary who fought successfully for abolition of Sati. But the theme is that a man is known by the company he keeps with.  This is beyond doubt.  A man moves with people of his type. Birds of a feather flock together. But again the theme is moving with persons you are working with.  Moving in social relation and friends differs from moving with persons you  work with.  You will definitely choose friends of your own liking and you will be known by the company you keep. But when it comes to work, you have to work with people of diverse type. It is a merit to adjust with persons of different type as I have said elsewhere in this thread.  You cannot always choose colleagues, boss and subordinates.  You have to work with those who have been appointed to work with you.

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Some have given example of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a great social revolutionary who fought successfully for abolition of Sati. But the theme is that a man is known by the company he keeps with.  This is beyond doubt.  A man moves with people of his type. Birds of a feather flock together. But again the theme is moving with persons you are working with.  Moving in social relation and friends differs from moving with persons you  work with.  You will definitely choose friends of your own liking and you will be known by the company you keep. But when it comes to work, you have to work with people of diverse type. It is a merit to adjust with persons of different type as I have said elsewhere in this thread.  You cannot always choose colleagues, boss and subordinates.  You have to work with those who have been appointed to work with you.

Of course sir, one cannot choose the personnel with whom you are going to work. Appointing the persons is in the somebody's hands. But can have the option to work with them or otherwise. If you are confident enough that you can make the personnel appointed to make them work according to your methods and beliefs, you can work with them. Otherwise your only option left for you is to quit. It all depends on how you view and and interpret the things.

While drawing an analogy with flocking birds,we have to accept that our avian friends hold a much superior record in terms of credibility and credentials.They always remain true to their feathers unlike their human counterparts who are notorious for flitting,flirting,strutting on borrowed and camouflaged feathers!!!

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Some have given example of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a great social revolutionary who fought successfully for abolition of Sati. But the theme is that a man is known by the company he keeps with.  This is beyond doubt.  A man moves with people of his type. Birds of a feather flock together. But again the theme is moving with persons you are working with.  Moving in social relation and friends differs from moving with persons you  work with.  You will definitely choose friends of your own liking and you will be known by the company you keep. But when it comes to work, you have to work with people of diverse type. It is a merit to adjust with persons of different type as I have said elsewhere in this thread.  You cannot always choose colleagues, boss and subordinates.  You have to work with those who have been appointed to work with you.

Of course sir, one cannot choose the personnel with whom you are going to work. Appointing the persons is in the somebody's hands. But can have the option to work with them or otherwise. If you are confident enough that you can make the personnel appointed to make them work according to your methods and beliefs, you can work with them. Otherwise your only option left for you is to quit. It all depends on how you view and and interpret the things.

My only fear is that if you can't adjust in working environment and decide to quit, then you may have to quit again and again as it is seldom that you get colleagues or associates according to your own choice. 

 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Some have given example of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a great social revolutionary who fought successfully for abolition of Sati. But the theme is that a man is known by the company he keeps with.  This is beyond doubt.  A man moves with people of his type. Birds of a feather flock together. But again the theme is moving with persons you are working with.  Moving in social relation and friends differs from moving with persons you  work with.  You will definitely choose friends of your own liking and you will be known by the company you keep. But when it comes to work, you have to work with people of diverse type. It is a merit to adjust with persons of different type as I have said elsewhere in this thread.  You cannot always choose colleagues, boss and subordinates.  You have to work with those who have been appointed to work with you.

Of course sir, one cannot choose the personnel with whom you are going to work. Appointing the persons is in the somebody's hands. But can have the option to work with them or otherwise. If you are confident enough that you can make the personnel appointed to make them work according to your methods and beliefs, you can work with them. Otherwise your only option left for you is to quit. It all depends on how you view and and interpret the things.

My only fear is that if you can't adjust in working environment and decide to quit, then you may have to quit again and again as it is seldom that you get colleagues or associates according to your own choice. 

 

Of course. Luckily it did not happen with me in the past. I  did not force anybody to follow me. It was the Boss of my Ad agency agreed with me. Seeing this my other colleagues to followed the suit.

 

 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

 

My only fear is that if you can't adjust in working environment and decide to quit, then you may have to quit again and again as it is seldom that you get colleagues or associates according to your own choice. 

 

 

Very true, we cannot choose nor change the atmosphere most of the times. We have to adjust and compromise at all levels or else you stick out like a sore thumb ! Expecting an organisation to adjust to you is unreasonable unless you have some stake in it ..

usha manohar wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

 

My only fear is that if you can't adjust in working environment and decide to quit, then you may have to quit again and again as it is seldom that you get colleagues or associates according to your own choice. 

 

 

Very true, we cannot choose nor change the atmosphere most of the times. We have to adjust and compromise at all levels or else you stick out like a sore thumb ! Expecting an organisation to adjust to you is unreasonable unless you have some stake in it ..

 

That is worth considering and give it a thought.

yes, our reputation depends on the people we are chatting with or the people with whom we are roaming here and there and also depends on the associate where we work day and night. people often compare us with whom they see with us 

bhuyali saroj wrote:

yes, our reputation depends on the people we are chatting with or the people with whom we are roaming here and there and also depends on the associate where we work day and night. people often compare us with whom they see with us 

Actually gone are the days when 'a person was known by the company he keeps". Earlier people used to attached more importance to such issues, but now it is entirely a person's own character and doings that dictate a person's reputation. Of course, the friend circle does play a part in that but only to a certain extent. So if one wanted to make his reputation grow in a positive manner, he or she will have to work towards and not just seek a suitable crowd.,

I was reading an interview with an upcoming actress and according to her, instead of acting as a leading lady in a small budget film, if she got a small role in a big budget film she would still take it because she would automatically be recognised as an A grade actress! This is how our society functions now...To a certain extent , may be to start with you may be recognised by the company you keep, but after that it depends entirely on you as to what your reputation would be depending on your work and contribution ..

In my initial college days along with some friends I broke the queue to get into a bus but failed to board it. An elderly gentleman asked us which college are we studying in. When we told him the name , he looked at us in a very somber manner and said, students of this college do not behave like this. My college was indeed the best and had a good reputation. Ever since I have realised that the company you belong to also gives you its reputation and expects you to live upto it. So @Kalyani stating that days are over for the company you keep is not right. It surely matters. We all know which party goons belong to, or the corrupt come from or  which party members use religion or which institution is respected for its service to the nation and so on.

Wel, I have heard this many times, we can estimate about a person by judging that persons colleagues or friends and all. But I never believe in such things. Every thing depends upon their individual attitude and their mind. Example am a girl who is very honest in working at office but colleague always escapes from the work but she is my friend. So you cannot judge me by just judge her.

sarala wrote:

Wel, I have heard this many times, we can estimate about a person by judging that persons colleagues or friends and all. But I never believe in such things. Every thing depends upon their individual attitude and their mind. Example am a girl who is very honest in working at office but colleague always escapes from the work but she is my friend. So you cannot judge me by just judge her.

 

Well, even i do agree, these days Honesty is not best. Before honesty dishonesty is first in race. So according to the situation we have to play our role. If we completely stay honesty we cannot live in this society. My view is being dishonesty is not wrong but cheating people is wrong.

Your own words in another thread, so which do we believe ?

vijay wrote:

In my initial college days along with some friends I broke the queue to get into a bus but failed to board it. An elderly gentleman asked us which college are we studying in. When we told him the name , he looked at us in a very somber manner and said, students of this college do not behave like this. My college was indeed the best and had a good reputation. Ever since I have realised that the company you belong to also gives you its reputation and expects you to live upto it. So @Kalyani stating that days are over for the company you keep is not right. It surely matters. We all know which party goons belong to, or the corrupt come from or  which party members use religion or which institution is respected for its service to the nation and so on.

 

As far as goons are concerned, they belong to all the political parties, there is not a single party which does not have goons in their fold. And what I was saying is applicable in general and in all walks of life. The example you cited about your college and its reputation, it holds not much water now., Because there are large number of people from all kinds of reputed institutes and schools, but no longer are seen sticking to the etiquette and decorum of what their respective school, college or whatever stood for. I would like to quote an example here of CME in Pune, the college of military engineering, one of finest in the country, that produces Army Officers in Engineering cadre, Now as you are obviously aware that Indian Army proudly addresses their army cadets as Gentleman Officers and these CME guys used to truly gentleman at one point of time. But in the last decade, there have innumerable instances where these 'gentlemen' have ganged up on hapless civilians and beaten them brutally. The reasons are several, including refusing to serve them after the hotel is closed, shopkeepers not stocking a particular item these people ask for etc. etc. So where is the reputation here? Once a full gang of these guys even stormed a local police station and dragged out constables outside and beat them up. 

@Kalyani is right but implied in her reply is the fact that even she expects members of reputed institutes to behave decently. That it is not happening is deviation which needs to be corrected.

vijay wrote:

@Kalyani is right but implied in her reply is the fact that even she expects members of reputed institutes to behave decently. That it is not happening is deviation which needs to be corrected.

Yes I do expect people from reputed institutes to behave decently because they owe to their alma mater and the society in general too., That is the reason those concerned institutions have the aura and respect and the decency and decorum that those concerned need to respect and preserve! Sadly, the deviation are too many and too frequently !

I would like to go with @Kalyani as well as with @vijay too. The fact is we still expect students from good schools, colleges or institutions to reflect dignity in their attitude and behaviour but in many cases it is missing nowadays and which is a very sorry state. By saying this I would like to point out that if a group of people misbehaves or have a taste for wild fun does not allow us to single out each and everyone and judge them. In a group we cannot expect all to be of the same kind but due to some common reason they are fastened together and they usually tend to behave in a same manner when they are together but by this if we adjudge them as wrong people then it's not worth. Usually, when college friends go for a picnic or so some misbehaviour do take place but there should be some level headed person to control so that no one crosses the limit. Remember, we are talking about general people and not goons so we should not harshly come to a conclusion by observing them when they are together because friends do get charged up but maybe in reality they are very different persons as individuals. So, give some time to judge a person. 

From my own experience , a well brought up individual may get out of hand in the company of friends or due to peer pressure but never resorts to criminal activities, which shows a weakness in one's nature. having fun while you are young even going above board at times is acceptable but not resorting to anti socail activities like destroying publi8c property and harming others, that is just not right !