FT Business School Rankings 2009 is out!  

Posted by NoeL in , , , , , , , , ,


FT Business School Rankings 2009 is out!

Here is the World's first 10:-

  1. University of Pennsylvania: Wharton - U.S.A.
  2. London Business School - U.K.
  3. Harvard Business School - U.S.A.
  4. Columbia Business School - U.S.A.
  5. Insead - France / Singapore
  6. Stanford University GSB - U.S.A.
  7. IE Business School – Spain
  8. CEIBS – China
  9. MIT: Sloan - U.S.A.
  10. New York University: Stern - U.S.A.
Here is Asia's Representation in FT Rankings 2009:-
  1. CEIBS - China - FT 8
  2. Indian School of Business - India - FT 15
  3. Hong Kong UST Business School - Hong Kong - FT 16
  4. Nanyang Business School - Singapore - FT 24
  5. National University of Singapore School of Business - Singapore - FT 35
Congrats ISB!

For more, Checkout!


ISB does it again! - Achieves Global Ranking of 15 (FT B-School Rankings 2009)  

Posted by NoeL in , , , ,

Hyderabad, January 27, 2009: The Indian School of Business (ISB) has been ranked  No: 15 in the global B-school rankings released by the Financial Times, London. Previously, in the year 2008, the ISB was ranked 20 by Financial Times, making it the first Indian business school to be counted among the world’s top 20. This is the second year in a row, when ISB has achieved a high rank among leading international business schools.

“I am very proud of the ISB’s achievement.  The high level of commitment of the faculty, students, alumni, and the staff at the ISB as well as the unstinting guidance of its associate schools and the Board, have made it possible for this new institution to overcome many challenges in its formative years,” said Rajat Gupta, Chairman, ISB. “ISB’s vision is to make high quality education accessible to a large number of aspirants and I am delighted that the school is growing steadily to fulfill that vision.”

The ISB was established in 2001 by a group of leading industrialists and academicians from India and abroad. From 126 students in 2001, ISB has steadily increased the number of students year after year. The Class of 2009 will have 440 students graduating in April 2009. ISB will be increasing the number of students to 560 in the Class of 2010. Recently, the ISB also announced the setting up of a second campus at Mohali which is likely to commence classes in 2012.

Congratulating the ISB community, Ajit Rangnekar, Dean, ISB, said, “This is a testimony of the dedication and commitment of our faculty, students, alumni, and staff. ISB’s success is a clear demonstration of how the will, energy, and ambition of a diverse group of people can achieve an overarching vision in a remarkably short time. We owe immense gratitude to our Board, our associate schools, our Faculty Heads from these schools, and the former Deans of ISB, who have guided us through our eventful journey.”

The ISB community gathered at the Atrium to celebrate the occasion. Spouses, students, staff, children, faculty, and alumni expressed their elation jubilantly. Echoing the sentiments of the entire student community, Rohit Kapoor, the President of the Graduate Student Board at the ISB said, “It is fantastic to witness history unfolding at my alma mater! I am amazed at the quality of faculty that teach us and at how much I have learnt and grown in the last few months. We are all extremely proud to be ISBians, ISB Rocks!”

Within a short span of eight years, the ISB has made a mark for itself as a premier, B-School in India. Since its inception, the ISB has been a leader in the field of management education by bringing in international best practices and people. The ISB introduced the one year programme, unique portfolio model of faculty, students with prior work experience and diverse backgrounds, the GMAT score as a selection criterion, lateral placements, international quality research and several other initiatives. Being ranked ‘Fifteen’ among global B-schools is a validation of the ISB’s effort to establish an international B-School located in India.

TISS 2009 - 11 Results  

Posted by NoeL in , , , , , , , ,

Today, the results of Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) are out for the admissions to its Post Graduate Programmes 2009 – 11. The results for the same can be obtained from the link below. TISS Results

I was looking up the results for someone who was very close to my heart. But what to say, the website just don’t load. That is when I decide to do some ‘wandering’ in this World Wide Web. Let me share with you all couple of things that I found interesting.

President Obama’s Inaugural Address
I had seen the entire ceremony live on CNN.com. I did expect much more from him in his inaugural address. The ‘hope’ and ‘change’ were limited to less than what was expected. Stock Markets world over, which were searching for a direction in this turbulent times, tumbled. Anyways, you can find the full text of his speech here.

Also the video can be watched here.

President Obama’s Speech at the Lincoln Memorial 1-18-09 Pre-Inauguration
Full text of his speech in it's crude form can be found here.
Also, find the video here.

Google Bomb!

How does a Google Bomb happen?
A Google Bomb happens when a group of people get together, coordinating themselves to link to a certain page using certain agreed-upon phrase, often for humorous or political purposes.

Read more about the latest Google Bomb “cheerful achievement” here.

Now, coming back to TISS Results, even after an hour and more than 100 refreshes, TISS results elude me. I have just sent in an email to TISS Admissions office as per their instructions on their website. I quote.

Candidates who are unable to see the Results after repeated attempts may send an email to pgadmissions@tiss.edu with details such as Registration Number, Centre, Course(s) Applied, Category and Date of Birth to know their results.

Hope to see the results soon.


Deconstructing the Mumbai Attacks  

Posted by NoeL in , , , , ,

(This article was published in the Mint – WSJ on 04 Dec 2008)
As terrorist attacks go, 26/11 scored a ten on ten. Military operations have their own telltale signs of professionalism in planning and execution.  And all signs indicate that this assault was well planned and executed.  The attacks themselves have been dissected and analyzed in great detail but if one were to go beyond the obvious blame games, one would see an analysis that is far more menacing in terms of implications and repercussions.

Intelligence analysts begin their assessment of such events by answering three fundamental questions. Firstly, who has the capability? Secondly, que bono? Who benefits and thirdly, what is likely to happen next. Answering the first two questions usually gives a fair idea of the third.

This attack was executed by well led professionals

The benchmarks of terrorist operations are synchronization, speed of execution, complexity of the mission and the end objectives.

Let’s examine these in some detail. There were at least 3-4 sub units with distinctly different targets. These targets were tactical and diversionary like CST and Leopold, strategic like Taj and Oberoi and surgical strikes like Nariman House. Synchronizing diverse categories of strikes down to an hour in conjunction with other diversions such as bombs in taxies, demonstrate abilities of a high degree.

Consider the number of planets that had to get in line for such an operation to be mounted and a clearer picture emerges.

At least five to eight executive teams were needed to effect such an operation.

Firstly, adequate number of motivated assets had to be found within the talent pool. Then they had to be trained for months, for the sea crossing, insertion into hostile territory, identifying targets, overcoming preliminary resistance and accomplishing the mission. They needed to be given intelligence, reconnaissance inputs, local logistics and communication support. The attacks had to be simultaneous to debilitate resources of anti-terrorist forces and yet had to be in common vicinity to facilitate a single insertion point.

Selection of Taj and Oberoi, as against say an Intercontinental or President, shows the intent to give the terrorist more operating space, and thus a larger window to cause damage and hold media attention. Surgical strike at Nariman house was to send a strong message to Israel since these assets would have been far more damaging in casualty terms in another hotel or office complex. Plus improvisation that indicates higher caliber of leadership. (The capture of boats for the last mile connectivity was certainly an improvisation because something went wrong. One doesn’t launch an operation across hundreds of kilometers into hostile territory hoping to find a boat that can be commandeered.)

All in all, a complex operation and well executed.

Who was behind this attack?

Which brings us back, to the first question. Who has the capability? The process of elimination based on elements of the operation brings it down to just three or four organizations. Of which, two, Naxalites and LTTE can be eliminated because their modus operandi does not warrant such attacks. So let us subject the two remaining organizations with the second question. Who benefits?

We find the answer to that question by answering another question? What did the terrorists want to achieve?

What they did was obvious. They stormed four locations and killed scores of victims. They held the nation to ransom. They were on TV for over three days. But let us see what they did not do. They did not hold hostages, and they did not intend to. Hostage takers do not indiscriminately cause collateral damage abinitio because that reduces the pressure on the state to save the lives of the remaining hostages. They were not aiming for highest possible casualties. Bombs in crowded places are a much better bet to achieve that objective. So just what did the terrorists want to achieve?

The answer– lies in asking how India feels in the aftermath of the incident. The unanimous consensus is summed up in one word – outraged! And when you put that hypothesis, everything falls into place. No hostages, no demands, just seemingly meaningless slaughter. Deep inside the nation’s backyard, multiple strikes, gunning
down expats, Israelis, 72 hours of mayhem, every minute of it televised - leaves a very angry nation in its wake.

So who benefits from an angry and outraged nation? When a nation is outraged – it needs to lash out. At its leadership or at someone else, or both. Lashing out at the leadership is evident in the mass wave of civil movement that has begun. Heads have rolled and the citizenry is demanding more.

But the interesting question is – who would India lash out at externally? After the parliament attack in 2001, the Indian leadership mobilized the defence forces into a precarious d├ętente that lasted over eight months. What if that happened again? Pakistan would have no choice but to reposition its troops from its eastern borders to counter the Indian mobilization, which means it would denude the area which Al-Qaeda has used as its base – and which was rapidly becoming their death knell between the US troops on one side and the Pakistani army on the other.

The Indian leadership cannot be seen as weak and doing nothing. At the very least, they would need to mobilize the Indian forces. Last time this happened in 2001, the Bush administration was very much in command with Parvez Musharraf controlling the Pakistani forces and the ISI. Now, there is no one in charge- in either the US or in Pakistan. When two traditionally hostile nuclear armies mobilize, provocation overcomes logic. Caught between the Pakistani Army and the US troops (who incidentally want to wind up operations in Iraq and refocus on Afghanistan as per the president elect’s agenda) – the best option for Al-Qaeda would be to start a provocation between a nation that has just gone through an ineffectual election and the other which is going into one – with the only mediator busy with the aftermath of its own. A brilliant move.

What does this mean for India?

What does all this mean for India? In the backdrop of the poor record in the financial crisis and internal security performance, the government will have to demonstrate concrete steps for a nation that is baying for blood. While rational elements will try to activate the back channels, it will be in Al-Qaeda’s interests to maintain the momentum driven by bloodthirstiness. And the obvious way to do that would be to keep India
reeling under a secondary wave of attacks. It is time for India to look beyond the obvious reactions to this event and understand the forces which are driving our actions at this stage.

And so, where do we begin? The answer lies in the basic construct of the attacks. This attack would not have been possible without local support, logistics and intelligence.

And that is the place to start the counterattack. Political patronage has long shielded the nexus of the local mafia and terrorist elements. Landing points in ports, laundered money, safe houses, immunity from the police and local logistics all need active support of criminal elements and political patronage. There is evidence to prove that we have information about exactly who these elements are and who safeguards them. The
answer to India’s battlefronts lies much closer than the jingoists would have us believe.
 It is time that India started with liquidating the enemy within.

India simply needs to make it horribly expensive for any politico-criminal nexus to even consider the option of being anti national. Channeling all our anger against this single point- should be our counter attack.

This thought leadership article was authored by Mahindra Special Services Group, India’s leading corporate risk consulting firm that advises companies and organizations on threat assessments and risk mitigation strategies. You may forward this article or use it on your website / advisories with attribution to MahindraSSG.

  • You con download the PDF version of this article here. 
  • For feedback please write to feedback@mahindrassg.com
Suggested Further Reading:-
  1. Business Today, 28th December 2008 Edition (Cover Story: Cost of Terror)


Legal Disclaimer

I study at European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel. The opinions expressed here are my own, and neither European Business School, Oestrich-Winkel nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.