How Trump-era politics is affecting worker morale and what to do about it

Consequences include marital stress, divorce, family separations and even sharp divides over national pastimes like football

Pundits are projecting this year’s midterm elections to be nasty, polarizing and “epic.”

They’re also expected to stress a lot of Americans out in every part of their lives. And that includes at the office.

I recently conducted a study on a broad range of workplace issues, including how the stress of our increasingly divisive politics is affecting worker health, productivity and relationships with colleagues. I also wondered: Is there anything company managers can do about it?

Growing divisiveness

Political divisiveness in America is hardly new.

Historians have traced its history all the way back to the founding founders. But politics seem to be dividing Americans more and more.

In a recent article in Scientific American, psychologists Cameron Brick and Sander van der Linden explained that individuals of different political ideologies “not only disagree on policy issues, they are also increasingly unwilling to live near each other, be friends, or get married to members of the other group.”

Consequences include marital stress, divorce, family separations and even sharp divides over national pastimes like football.

There is a bright side – if you’re a therapist and benefiting from an uptick in business perhaps as the result of a malady described as “Trump Anxiety Disorder.”

Politics at work

I wanted to see just how bad it’s getting in the workplace.

My field study, conducted this past summer and part of a larger project I intend to have peer-reviewed and published on the anxiety-inducing properties of political conflict, conjoins my interests in the areas of incivility, entitlement, worker self-serving behavior and bullying.

I asked 550 full-time workers whose email addresses I obtained through my undergraduate students to react to hundreds of statements about a wide variety of work issues, from abusive bosses and workplace relationships to incivility and health. I also asked about the pervasiveness and impact of unwelcome partisan exchanges.

Participants were asked to indicate how much they agreed with each statement, from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Most of the workers were based in the eastern or southeastern United States, but some were scattered throughout the country. Key characteristics of the data such as age, gender and ethnicities are broadly in line with national statistics.

Using students to solicit participants in a survey has become an increasingly common and important research tool. As such, although the data aren’t entirely representative of the U.S., I believe they still offer meaningful insights. (more)

Article Source : Business Standard.

Why Walmart's Flipkart acquisition is its admission of defeat in India

This deal isn't a sign that India is leapfrogging past big-box stores to some digital retail utopia

Walmart Inc. might want to portray its $16 billion purchase of India's largest e-commerce firm, Flipkart Group, as a brilliant strategic move, long-planned in secret, that would allow the U.S. retail giant to manage the transition away from big-box stores globally. Yet, the truth is that the deal represents a second-best outcome -- if that -- for Walmart as well as for Indian consumers and farmers.

In the 11 years that Walmart has operated in India, it’s signally failed to build up its own business. That’s not entirely the company’s fault. In fact, it’s a reminder that India remains, in some ways, as inhospitable to foreign businesses as the People's Republic of China.

For over a decade, successive Indian governments have denied permission to Walmart -- and peers such as Carrefour SA -- to open up their own stores. Foreign investors can enter into partnerships with local retailers -- Walmart had one with Bharti Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. -- but they can't control the consumer-facing end of the business, and their supply chains are subject to fearsome additional regulations. When foreign investment in supermarkets was finally permitted in 2012, for example, the previous government required any major, foreign-backed outlets to source 30 percent of the processed or manufactured goods they sold -- by value -- from tiny Indian enterprises worth less than $1 million apiece. The government also blocked companies such as Walmart from expanding into small-town India, restricting them to cities with populations over 1 million people.

It's no coincidence that Walmart closed its deal with Flipkart now. Its joint venture with Bharti went bad a few years ago. And, in January, the possibility of having its own stores seemed finally to have closed, after the government made it marginally easier for single-brand retailers such as Ikea Group to open up stores in India but left restrictions on multi-brand retailers untouched. Even the relatively investment-friendly administration of Prime Minister Narendra Modi appears to be afraid of Walmart, possibly because the strongest political support for Modi's party has always come from small shopkeepers. Clearly, the company needed another strategy.

Walmart would’ve struggled to open its own e-commerce business as well, given that India doesn't permit foreign investment in online retailing. All you can set up are "marketplaces.” So Amazon India can't hold any of its own stock, and Indians can't buy directly from Amazon. Instead, Amazon works in India like eBay, serving as a clearinghouse for other people's goods; it’s forbidden from holding any inventory of its own. It can't even provide easy refunds.

RCom: Will the monetisation plan work?

RCom has also talked about monetising its real estate but that is easier said than done

Anil-Ambani led Reliance Communications' offer to lenders to take control of the company by converting Rs 7,100 crore of its debt into a 51 per cent equity stake is perhaps the telecom major's best bet. If the latest rescue attempt goes through, lenders led by SBI will hold at least 51 per cent in the telco and promoters stake will be halved to around 26 per cent.

RCom has said it will get about Rs 17,000 crore by monetising its assets. The plan includes selling its tower business, fibre network, and media convergence nodes and it will estimates another Rs 10,000 crore through real estate sales in eight cities. Post debt monetisation, the company said it would have only Rs 6,000 crore of debt left. Moreover, another Rs 4,000 crore taken from unsecured creditors like Ericsson needs to be negotiated with.

So how prudent is this monetisation plan?*

Under its earlier plan, RCom had said it would cut its debt by half by December through a merger with Aircel and sale of majority stake in its tower business to Canada-based investment firm Brookfield Infrastructure for Rs 11,000 crore, valuing the business at Rs 20,000 crore. However, now that the Aircel deal is off and RCom shutting down its 2G business, which constitutes for a bulk of its subscribers, the deal valuation is likely to be revised downwards. In essence, the telecom tower deal is subject to a new valuation given that Aircel’s tenancies will not be included in the deal anymore. Moreover, RCom now runs the risk of losing at least half of its 2G subscribers.

Also Read : New Year disruption plan: Now, Reliance Jio moves to broadband, TV space

Analysts say that even if RCom sells the entire 100 per cent stake in its 43,600 tower assets to Brookfield it will not fetch them more than Rs 8,000 crore.

RCom is hoping that it will be able to rake in Rs 14,000 crore from its spectrum sale though the value of the spectrum is Rs 26,000 crore, which includes spectrum it got from the merger of MTS. However, analysts are of the view that there is already a huge oversupply of spectrum, and that the paper price might not be reflected in reality. RCom may also not find many takers for its spectrum given how things went down with Telenor and TTSL which gave their spectrum virtually free to Bharti Airtel. (more)

Tamil Nadu: Blow for Karunanidhi family's business interests?

Tamil Nadu: Blow for Karunanidhi family's business interests?

Thursday’s state election results are likely to make the fortunes for some businesses and mar for some others. The biggest and most prominent loser of the day was from the family of DMK chief M Karunanidhi. On the day of the results, the Sun TV stock lost Rs 2,229 crore in market value. Its market capitalisation fell from Rs 16,845 crore at its close on Thursday to Rs 14,616 crore at the end of the day. By virtue of his 75 per cent holding, DMK chief M Karunanidhi’s grandnephewKalanithi Maran would take three-fourths of that hit.

This notional loss could be an indicator of the bad news in store for the family’s business interests that extend beyond media. While Maran was among the first in the family to get into organised business through his venture into broadcast media in the early 1990s, there were others who have followed in his footsteps. After a brief break-up in relations with the Marans, Karunanidhi’s immediate family members floated Kalaignar TV in 2007. At the time Karunanidhi’s wife Dayalu Ammal owned 60 per cent, while his daughter Kanimozhi owned 20 per cent. Karunanidhi’s grandsons, from his sons Stalin and Azhagiri have also built interests in a range of businesses from real estate to movies to granite mining.

The management of Sun TV has often maintained that its business is independent of the government in power, but the market seems to be understanding it differently. A second term of the AIADMK could prove to be tougher for the family as it does not have the cushion of a friendly regime at the Centre. Read more.

ASUS GL552VW: Lightweight and decent gaming notebook

At Rs 82,490, this laptop makes a nice proposition for any gamer

A friend from school got in touch the other day after a really long time. A high-flying information technology (IT) consultant and mentor now, I've always admired him for blowing up his first big bonus on a state-of-the-art gaming laptop roughly around the time I was taking baby steps in journalism. But years of carrying around mean gaming machines had taken their toll; as he still spent considerable time in airport lounges and on flights, he was looking for a lighter gaming notebook, he said.

A gaming laptop that's light? It used to be something of a paradox. Till I came across the ASUS Republic of Gamers (ROG) GL552VW (Rs 82,490), launched late last month. At a shade above 2.5kg, this 15.6-inch notebook was roughly the weight of any mainstream laptop. Read more.

LG K7: Offers nothing special

The K7 is designed well. LG calls it a glossy pebble design. The main feature of the design is the lack of buttons on the sides




LG launched the K7, along with the K10, last week. This is the company's first big launch in the sub-Rs 10,000 segment this year.

The K7 is designed well. LG calls it a glossy pebble design. The main feature of the design is the lack of buttons on the sides. The clutter-free design will impress anyone who wants a looker. The power button is on the plastic back, close to the camera and flash. The volume buttons flank the power button. The body is curved and it is easy to carry around.

The LG K7 sports a 5-inch display. Its touch interface is smooth and there is no lag. But, the phone's screen makes it difficult for practical use. In direct sunlight, one can read emails only if the brightness is set to 100 per cent; this might be fine in itself but is not on a par with its competitors.

While the display is slightly curved due to LG's Arc glass and is pleasing to the eyes, its resolution of 854x480 pixels is old technology. It is difficult to grasp why LG went in for such an average display. See more features about LG K7.

All you need to know about the Kohinoor diamond and why it may not come back to India

 The controversy over one of India’s long-cherished treasures, the 105-carat Kohinoor diamond, may finally achieve some official, if not emotional, closure with the Indian government deciding not to stake its claim to the famed rock because "it was neither stolen nor forcibly taken away".

The return of Kohinoor diamond to India has been a long-standing demand, with many claiming that the diamond was taken forcibly. The fight to get back the diamond has been ongoing since India's independence. Business Standard takes a look at the legend of the Kohinoor diamond, which has become a symbol for India's past riches, and their plunder by successive rulers.

Ownership of the diamond

After the subjugation of Punjab in 1849 by British forces, the properties of the Sikh Empire were confiscated. The Kohinoor was transferred to the treasury of the British East India Company in Lahore. The diamond was shipped to Britain and was handed to Queen Victoria in July 1850. It was cut to improve its brilliance and was mounted into Queen Victoria’s crown. The diamond now sits in the Tower of London along with the Crown Jewels.

People of India have longed for the return of Kohinoor for years. Many Indians demanded the return of the diamond when Elizabeth II made a state visit to India to mark the 50th anniversary of India's independence from Britain in 1997.

The Indian government, believing the gem was rightfully theirs, made the first demand for the return of the Kohinoor diamond soon after independence. A second request followed in 1953, the year of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. Each time, the British government refuted the claims, saying that ownership was non-negotiable.

In 2000, several members of the Indian Parliament signed a letter calling for the diamond to be given back to India, claiming it was taken illegally. British officials said that a variety of claims meant it was impossible to establish the gem's original owner.

A similar demand was made during UK President David Cameron’s visit to India. To which Cameron responded that he doesn’t believe in "returnism".

Cameron said that it is not the right approach to return the diamond to India and said, "If you say yes to one you suddenly find the British Museum would be empty. I am afraid to say, it is going to have to stay put."Read More

Maruti Suzuki struggles to meet demand for Baleno

Maruti Suzuki struggles to meet demand for Baleno

Customers who booked the Baleno, Maruti Suzuki’s latest premium hatchback, may have to wait for up to six months for delivery. The company is struggling to meet demand and production can only be increased at the cost of other models.

The country’s biggest car manufacturer is facing production constraints with the Baleno forcing it to juggleoutput between domestic and export markets. The Baleno is among the top selling cars with unserviced bookings of 55,000 units and sales of 44,000 units in just six months.
Maruti Suzuki India (MSIL) started exporting the hatchback in January to Europe and Japan, leading to lower supply in domestic market, a consistent fall since December.
Domestic volumes of Baleno dipped 41 per cent in March to 6,236 units, lowest since its launch, compared with 10,572 units in December, the best month so far.
This is even as the exports have more than trebled in the past three months to close at 5,600 in March from 1,800 in January, according to MSIL.
The company is running its plants in Haryana at near-full capacity, with incremental volumes coming only through improvisations such as debottlenecking. Increasing the Baleno’s production beyond this will mean sacrificing volumes of other models. “We expect Maruti Suzuki to hit acapacity roadblock this year despite efforts at debottlenecking its stated manufacturing capacity of 1.55 million units. The Gujarat plant is expected to add 0.25 million units of capacity only next year,” said a Religare report.
MSIL has said the Baleno production expansion is going as planned but demand continues to outstrip supply. In addition, sources say, there could be issues in ramping up component supplies from the vendors. R C Bhargava, chairman, MSIL said, “When there is a surge in demand of a particular product, we have to make a judgment on what the long-term demand is going to be and what is the optimum mix. Capacity has to be increased, but by how much?”. Read More

Xiaomi Mi 5: A flagship at half the price

When I first heard the price of the Xiaomi Mi 5, I was intrigued. A China-based handset maker, known for offering decent hardware at extremely low prices, moving into the mid-range segment? What were they smoking?

Don't get me wrong. I've owned a Mi 3 and my regular phone is a Redmi 2, but this defied logic. I got the answer a few days later when I got my hands on a review sample of the Mi 5.

The white handset with its chamfered edges and glass back has a premium look, though I daresay, is slippery to hold. Blame it on the very thin edges and the non-existent bezel on the sides of the 5.15-inch screen, which seems to seamlessly merge into the back. In a first, the Mi 5 sports a physical home button below the screen, which does double duty as a fingerprint scanner.

Setting up is fairly simple, especially the fingerprint scanner. Since I already had a Mi account, I could restore the apps from my Redmi 2. The Mi 5 runs Miui 7, which is based on Android Marshmallow, though some unique features of the stock OS seem to be absent. Suffice to say anyone who's used Miui earlier will feel right at home.

Since the phone sports the latest Snapdragon 820 processor paired with 3GB of RAM, I downloaded Riptide GP 2 and Asphalt 8: Airborne. Thankfully, after a five-hour stint of the above two games, along with NFS: Most Wanted, the phone was pretty warm but not scalding hot. But since the speakers are on the bottom edge, I ended up muffling the sound most of my playing time. The battery, too, took a hit

Next, after charging the phone fully in around 90 minutes (when the phone warmed up again), I stepped out. Since it supports Sunlight Display like the Mi4i, I didn't need to squint to read emails. This phone supports voice over LTE (or VoLTE), the next big thing for users.

I then fired up the Chrome browser, opened some six-seven tabs, and played NFS. No sweat at all. Then I watched Master of None on Netflix. The good thing is, theAirtel 4G network stayed true and there was no stuttering or buffering, despite the apps running in the background.

The camera didn't disappoint. I got quite a few shots of trucks rushing by, which otherwise would have been blurred. There are also a lot of options and filters in the camera app. I especially liked the voice trigger and the ability to pick microphones while shooting 4K videos. The four-axis image stabiliser helped immensely. And yes, this is possibly among the best video cameras I've seen on a phone.

But low-light shots were full of noise. I also had some fun with the selfie cam, which tries guessing your age; it was way off the mark while the snaps were okay. Battery life, too, was fairly decent, and I got through a day with heavy email usage calling, messaging a little bit of games and videos and some photography.

At Rs 24,999, the Xiaomi Mi 5 has a lot going as a flagship; the only things missing are expandable storage; water-proofing and a quad HD screen, available on phones double its price. But it will face stiff competition from the Lenovo Vibe X3, OnePlus 2 and Asus Zenfone 2, which might have older hardware, but are very good phones nonetheless.

Paytm, Snapdeal can wait. Alibaba likely to enter India on its own

Whether the Jack Ma-led Chinese major enters the Indian e-commerce sector as Alibaba or 'Alibaba plus', there will be two definite gainers, consumers and the segment.
Analysts and stakeholders said so to Business Standard after the surprise statement by a company executive on Friday evening. "We are planning to enter the e-commerce business in India in 2016,'' Alibaba group president J Michael Evans told reporters here, after his meeting with communications and information technology minister Ravi Shankar Prasad.
Alibaba, in the headlines for months following a stunning initial public offering in 2014, is yet to reveal its India plans. This has kept the e-commerce world guessing on what its entry would mean to the existing entities and the sector.
Most experts say Alibaba is likely to make a dash into Indian e-commerce on its own, quite like Amazon did almost three years earlier. Its investments in existing players such as Paytm and Snapdeal could run parallel to its standalone India play, they suggest.
A comment on the latest development could not be had from digital wallet and online marketplace Paytm, where Alibaba has a majority shareholding.
Harish H V, partner (India leadership team), Grant Thornton, said Alibaba has substantial cash and is sure to make massive investments here. That will mean two big international players, the other being Amazon, competing in India. How the competition unfolds will depend on whether Alibaba comes alone into e-commerce or along with the companies where it has already invested, such as Paytm and Snapdeal. Reports suggested it considered investing in Flipkart, too, which the latter denied.
"If Alibaba actually enters India in tie-ups with the other e-commerce companies, the sector could well split into two camps-Amazon versus the rest,'' the consultant said, adding this was only one of the scenarios. However, this looks unlikely. Most leading companies have been talking of a long-term play in this space. Also, these companies command steep valuation.