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