|
Re: India is the un-China, says Time
de mbl* 06/20/2006 08:38
Murphy wrote:
> "Dr.Sahib.Pandit.Shri.Shri.Rainam Ji Maharaj Ji Ustad"
> <praina246898@rediffmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1150789721.972649.132010@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1724081,00050002.htm
> >
> > A "breathtaking shift" in US policy towards India - declaring it a
> > strategic partner and offering it a bilateral deal to share nuclear
> > know how - can be explained, according to Time magazine, simply by one
> > phrase: India is the un-China.
> >
> > Washington's new approach to India is so explained by the American news
> > magazine in its latest issue hitting the news stands on Monday with its
> > cover story "INDIA INC - Why the World's Biggest Democracy is the Next
> > Great Economic Superpower- and What it Means for America."
>
> As usual, time magazine is far behind the curve. India hit its climax last
> year and is only going down. Backsourcing of jobs to the U.S. and the lack
> of real talent in India are the biggest reasons and it's going to put
> India's economy in a depression. This also means that Dr Shithead Sahib
> will have to get a real job scooping shit instead of posting his spam shit
> here all day.
Back-sourcing: lack of talent is not the cause of this phenomenon. The
fault is greed and the lack of knowledge of the people and the culture
of the out-sourced country. All the executives saw was the labour cost,
the ability to speak and understand English, and the ability to work a
computer keyboard.All the promoters saw was the savings in money
because of the differences in labour cost. On paper it looked like a
profit making system.
Let us look at just the "Telephone Answering Service". No one took into
consideration whether a bright young Indian telephone operator would
easily understand a broad Yorkshireman or a Scotsman who has never
travelled out of Glasgow all his life with their heavy regional accent.
Or vice versa, whether, these men could understand the accent of a
young Indian who spoke like everyone else from their village? Or
whether the Indian operator understood English colloqialisms or diction
not normally used in India? The use of diction, varies with regions,
and pronounciations also vary a great deal. Then there is the
geography, and the references to local shops, that are by-words in
England but never heard of in India. Like, the "chippy", or "Boots",
or"visionexpress", or "MnS", or "Natwest", or "bt", or "2 quids
worth", or "surgery", or "will it be a Chinese or Indian?"and so many
phrases in common use here that makes no sense over there. So naturally
there is complete frustration, and that leads to mistrust and
suspicions. Would you dare make a bank transfer when you are not sure
if you were properly understood?
So The sponsor company management did not understand what was the real
spoken English usuage in India, and the Indian manager assumed that
there would be no problems, that could not be surmounted. This has led
to a completely fiasco of that outsourced Telephone Answering Service.
That is just one example of lack of understand of one another.