Life provides two ways of looking at and doing things. The first, is the safest and mostly followed by a majority and generally has a monotonous but pompous look. It is mostly concerned with outside form or external look. The second, is a way of looking at things inside out. It involves touching the core of the activity and more concerned with the quality of the output. The first is an easier approach, which has set methods in place, whereas the second needs some break-free-from-ordinary attitude.
Most of the recent big budgeted movies fall into the first category. They are made with expensive budgets and shot with big stars in expensive locations and are promoted with made-up controversaries. The main motto of this type is to turn more eye balls with marketing gimmicks and make instant profits. The people of this kind are less attentive about the intricate details like story development, dialogues and characterizations which falls into the second category. This second category of looking at things by taking care of the essential things and evaluating the usefullness of the product to the end customer i.e. the audience, is neglected and it shows the utter lack of respect for the quality of the product that is being made. And correctly, these films are being shown the door by a majority and even the minority of people who patronize are successfully fooled and anyway mostly belong to the kind of people who appreciate the first category.
This categorization, by me, of the ways of looking and doing things, is actually motivated by a few managers in my profession. It reminds me of their strange ways of managing things. Now I want to analyze based on the two categories which I wrote here. And it starts and ends with the weekly project status meetings. Every activity of the project is tracked in project plan with a start date and end date. At the end of every week, there is a weekly status meeting and the activities status is indicated in green, if it is completed or in red, if it is delayed. And the manager who falls into the first category is always worried about these colors. Whatever be the reson for delay, the manager always wants to see green. If any activity gets delayed, the manager is only concerned with the outer look, i.e the color “Red”, and doesnot care to look deeper into the core of the problem. The manager will just try to force changes to change the color to green, without actually addressing the core reason for the delay. By just looking at the outer form, the manager is looking for temporary satisfaction.
By looking deeper into the core of the activity, the manager will be in a better position to understand the real reason for the color “Red”. Then it will be possible for manager to raise above the levels of colors and see the reality. And managers who do that will fall into the second category and are highly needed and for them “Red is just a color”.
Some other examples of this classification are :
IPL falls into the first category, Test cricket into the second.
Interior decoration falls into the first category, house construction into the second.
Owning a luxury car falls into the first category, the necessity into the second.
Monotony into the first category, creativity into the second.
The dress you wear into the first, “you” into the second.
At certain level, we all see Red and Green in everything we do. How we treat them depends on to which category we belong or to which category we want to belong.
Afternote:
Its true that both categories go hand in hand, but the deciding factor depends on the dominating category.


