FATE MADE US MEET (NIK ZAFRI MEETS YAB (Allahyarham) NIK AZIZ)

‪#‎nikabdulaziznikmat‬

(Note : The highlight is done purposely)

Against all odds, I was the only civillian participating in the Law Journal Competition - National Level (certificate signed by the then and Allahyarham Dean of IIU (the legendary Tan Sri Datuk Prof. Ahmad Mohamed Ibrahim) and the then/Allahyarham Hon. Minister of Justice.

The theme of my journal was 'Syariah Law and Civil Law (and its' role in the Constitution)'

I sent a copy to a friend of mine, (now Dato' Paduka) Haji Husam Musa (was then the Press Secretary to Hon. Chief Minister/Menteri Besar of Kelantan) to be forwarded to (Allahyarham) YAB Tuan Guru (Dato' Bentara Setia Haji) Nik Abdul Aziz Bin Nik Mat to get his comments (Allahyarham Tuan Guru was then - only one week holding the Honourable Chief Minister of Kelantan's post) - (a copy was also sent to Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed who was then the Prime Minister of Malaysia)

A week later, Hj. Husam faxed an invitation to my parents' office in Kota Bharu - to my surprise - I was granted an exclusive research interview (which lasted around 2 1/2 hours on the subject matter) with the YAB Menteri Besar of Kelantan himself.

I recalled when I first walked in, he greeted me with a 'Salam' and said "Kita duo ni anok branok sebenarnyo, jadi panggil 'Ayoh Zih' doh la deh" ("We are related, so just address me as 'Ayah Zih' (a common way to address an uncle) 

It was a fruitful interview. He praised my efforts and expressed how proud he was seeing my hard work and even said that he foresee that I will become a successful person one day - - perhaps a bridge between the opposition and the government. ('Amin' to that)

A month after the interview, Haji Husam called up my parents saying that YAB Tuan Guru wanted to visit my parents in Lundang, Kota Bharu in his capacity as a relative. I recalled Hj Husam told my parents about the interview. (This was in 1990)

I had a surprise again. YAB Tuan Guru expressed gratitude to my parents including my aunt/uncle despite the political differences - for helping him out in the late 70s (nearly 20 years ago) when he was back from Mecca - was not feeling very well even having a high fever/vomitting/nausea etc. Tuan Guru ended up spending a night at my aunt/uncle's house in Petaling Jaya.

The best parts of (Allahyarham) YAB Tuan Guru Dato' Bentara Setia Haji Nik Abdul Aziz that I will always remember :

1. Despite the political differences, he would never sever the ties of relationship with relatives, (something that I did not see much today)

2. He remembers facts clearly (evident - during my research interview) and he never forgets what others have done good to him even 20 years have passed. Most people do not have that value in them anymore.

AL-FATIHAH.

K-ECONOMY, K-MANAGEMENT, K-ORGANIZATION,HUMAN CAPITAL, ICT – YOU'RE STILL CONFUSED? (BY NIK ZAFRI)

The battle of defining knowledge management is a never ending story.

(Cummon guys....it's 2010 now..what? you wanna wait till 2020..gosh)

To me KM; having working with bluechips that have proven themselves worthy to be called a KM and KE (Knowledge-Based Economy) – based organizations, I would still agree that :


“KM is a organizational-wide collecton of practices and approaches to generate, capture, disseminate the know-how and others relevant with the perspective of business sustainability and profit”

This is the best definition I see so far.

To those who are or has directly been involved in organizational KM will understand exactly what this definition mean.

The definition has; to a highest degree; harmoniously combined both organizational empirical PROVEN VALUES with ICT as enablers. (Mind you - please do not provide me hypotheses in your counter comments to this article as what I've said herein have been substantiated with proof. )

KM in these organizations is no longer a buzzword, lip-service or trendy – KM is a MUST to them in order to cope up with rapid changes as we are no longer absorbed to the ancient story “who moved my cheese”.

I've seen companies' thrill of victory - making billions due to proper applicaton of KM. Unfortunately; due to certain constraint; I can't reveal any of the companies name as these are their secret recipes of success – trust me (so don't ask)

But on the other hand, I've also witnessed companies' agony of defeat being closed even go bust – due to WRONG applications used and wrong way of 'hybriding' management systems. In the end, the practitioners themselves tend to be CONFUSED themselves.

Communication has evolved rapidly due to the phrase 'knowledge sharing'. It helps in the context of maintaining the 'one captain in one ship' and 'one (management) game plan'. Grapevine at its best!!

We are no longer alone!

If we have to collaborate, then do so!
If we have to be a smart partner or associate, then be one!
If we have to merge; merge then!

(But why the defensive and protective attitude..you wanna go global - don't you, you wanna grow bigger, don't you?)


K-Economy unlike P-Economy (although productivity is still an inevitable issue) everything and everyone in any organization will have a certain impact on the overall economy itself.

Better – these organizations can still 'make money' during recession. (yes, this is what I'm talking about – bearish during good times and bullish to make a comeback during 'bad times')

Face it - Today - economy NO longer depends solely on the "conventionals" such as movement of composite index in the stock market, inflation/deflation, candlestick/technical charts, oil price, USD, political & psychological sentiments, bull or bear, speculation or hedging etc.

BUT

rather we are seeking a more convincing story like PROPER JUSTIFICATIONS or 'COHERENT FACTORS' to JUSTIFY of WHY are there economical fluctuations? or WHY are the charts indicating erratic trends or probably WHAT has political sentiments got to do with the stock market etc. (in laymen terms - not limited only to economist but people at large as well regardless of who they are or where they come from)

(I recalled the The Oracle advising Neo in Matrix Reloaded:

“You didn't come here to make a decision, you already made the decision, now you need to understand WHY you make such decision” (something like that)

So, these justifications require KNOWLEDGE – proper KNOWLEDGE from your own skills, competencies, experience etc. Even paper qualifications are no longer a priority.


“Today – Nik, if there is no control on qualifications being issued, one day you throw a stone in the air, it will definitely hit on a Master Degree Holder's head”

– quoting what the-then Prime Minister, the living legend – Tun Dr. Mahathir once said to me in 1995 when doing the site-walk during the construction of KLCC Petronas Towers.

Tips :

Understand first the scope of service or product provision that your company is doing.

Draw up the core business process

Decide what sort of ICT application or system to be used to expedite operation.

What did you say? I don't understand - well, Bill Gates said that something like this


"KM doesn't even START with a software or application!"

THE KPI AND KRA ANECDOTE

I suppose most of us nationwide is aware of the KPI and KRA especially those who have heard about YAB PM recently announced.

So I like you all to take a bit of time to read the following and be alert on my 'cooking of management phrases'

Let's go to the Key Results Areas first (KRA). KRA was born from Management by Objective (MBO) concept introduced by Peter Drucker in 1954. I think KRA is not really part from MBO but rather an evolution to clarify Objectives and Goals better.

(Via a consulting firm in 1997, I was one of the accredited MBO consultant for few Banking and Financial Institutions)

To make it simple - I will explain briefly what to expect from MBO.

It has a Mission Statement then Objectives, Goals and finally Key Result Areas (KRA). Hmm how to put it huh? Ok...input and output hence Productivity was born together with Benchmarking.

The then PM, Honourable Tun Dr. Mahathir introduced the 'Participative Management Concept' via the Look East Policy somewhere around 1982 and the rest is history (Malaysian Incorporated, Privatization, Proton Saga and so on) The participative management is part of what we commonly know as Total Quality Management (TQM) where among others it promote teamwork, bottom-up management, QCC Tools, Small Group Activities (SGA), Six Sigma, human capital, PLAN-DO-CHECK-ACT (PDCA) etc.

The participative management concept has evolutionized MBO further which I also believe the reason for KRA to exist so that it would be on 'mutual consent' basis between the 'setter' and the 'implementer'.

Back to MBO, conceptually speaking, the only thing that may not be measurable is the Mission Statement (although some put 'to become 'x' in 'x' years' while the rest are ALL measurable - be it Objective, Goals and KRA. 'Objectives' in MBO are key strategies to achieve the Mission Statement. Goals in MBO are 'short term objectives' to achieve Main 'Objectives'.

At the micro level (immediately after Goals) KRA is the output expected within a certain period of time.

The art of measuring is also known as 'Benchmarking' (get it?)

In Human Resources, MBO/KRA facilitates the formation of Job Descriptions, Performance Indicators (also related to KPI) and Responsibilities/Authorities.

Objectives and Goals are measured using % where they are being prioritized by a 'brainstorming' session (SGA/QCC) But the numbers of Objectives and Goals may not be the same. Example - One Objective may require two different goals. KRA is considered as the output which will determine the success implementation and continual improvment of Goals and Objectives (cascading principle)

ISO 9000 also has a similar concept known as Department/Unit Objectives which are also 'measureable'.

However most people argued with me that it should also be 'achievable' (although it does not SAY "achievable" in the ISO clause) I disagreed because the 'achievable' may also depend on the scope of work of a business entity.

Say for example, the Department Objective of a 'construction division' is

"to reduce 'x' wastages to...say...3% per 6 months"

What arguers don't see is that :

a) this relates to the value and magnitude of the project itself and
b) the quantity surveyor/purchaser buying 'buffer stock' - just in case

I asked the 'arguers' - what if the contractor gained a bigger project?

The 3% need to be reviewed as it may be TOO MUCH to achieve (for a bigger project) - it should be reduced to 2% but the implementers must justify why it is being reduced. Agreed? (so the arguers now are now my supporters)

So this reviewal or adjustment or ALIGNMENT is also known as BALANCE SCORECARD. (more confused you are all I guess - not to worry - I'm almost finished) Balance Scorecard is part of Strategic Planning and Management popularized by Kaplan (of Harvard) and David Norton. The purpose is to ALIGN activities to the organizational 'vision and strategy', improve communication breakdowns (also in ISO as well), and monitor organization performance against strategic goals (also in Objectives & Goals of MBO) It is to give the implementers a more 'balanced' view of organizational performance. (see ISO's Data Analysis + Quality Cost below)

Again, ISO 9000 concept of Objectives are also based on MBO/KRA as well. But the good thing that we can adopt from ISO is that there is an activity call the 'Data Analysis' for Action Plans/Continual Improvement (not only having statistics and do not know what to do with it) Here's something for all the readers/decision makers to think before you leap :

In Data Analysis, you have number of non-conformances (NCR) per product and you will compare them with other products range (or services). Sometimes, on screen, you see the NCR is high (be it major or minor) on the system (which require minor amendment in certain documentation) and you also see certain NCR is low.

Be careful, go further by 3rd level analysis (by cost - or - Quality Cost) You will find that the 'high NCR' may only cost you about RM1.00 or less!! Why? Because the NCR is about amending documentation - papers or perhaps 'online documentation'. But you'll be shocked to find that the 'lower NCR' are major defects on your product that may cost you MILLIONS although the NCR is only 1 -2. So be careful during an analysis especially when you're doing ISO 9000. And also, don't focus at the 'bad numbers' but also the 'good numbers' (conformity) - as the latter will help you in BRANDING yourself - how do you want your customers to view you....so don't forget your strengths as well (SWOT)

But at least you can learn two things :

a) An objective or goals or KRA may not be 'ACHIEVABLE' if properly justified, (but they should be MEASURABLE of course)
b) You must have a THOROUGH data analysis and find out 'what went wrong' before you make decision.

Hey..wait a sec...where's KPI?

Huh, don't you see? KPI + KRA = BALANCE SCORECARD!! Gotcha!! (That's why I highlighted Balance Scorecard in BOLD)

So don't worry guys, just learn Balance Scorecard and you will learn everything that I've said here now. I'm sure the YAB Prime Minister would agree with me...I'm sure a lot 'thinkers' are telling him 'this and that' and he says...NO WAY...make it simple not complex...so the KPI + KRA are born - one is input, the other is output.

What do you think NIK?

I think that everything I've mentioned here is KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT...tadaaaah

The End

THE NORMAL ANECDOTE

I'm back!!

I've been relooking into the 1998 - 2001 Malaysian economy and discovered many great things. Not about the recession but about how we rebound and learn from our past mistakes. There have been hiccups here and there but yet we survived. I think IF given limited choice, which were the best two ideas that helped - I would vote for two (Of course it's the Legendary Tun M) :

a) 'controversial' decision to peg the RM to the USD and
b) Reintroducing/Rebranding of ICT & new technology

Between 1999 - 2000, new technology including ICT have been reintroduced 'cautiously' into the market and this time, the technology are there to stay and a lot of good things been happening. To mention a few, the Knowledge Management era, B2B/B2C and finally e-commerce.

Numbers of IPOs increased dramatically especially those having to do with technological stocks.

Early 2001 US Market a.k.a. NASDAQ experienced a 'burst of technological bubble'. The Feds attempted to minimize borrowings by increasing the rates to stop bubble burst but the effort came too late.

Then I dig further which leads me towards the fundamental principles of economy. I did say these sacred words (where was it huh?):

"If everybody want to sell, who wants to buy" or "If everyone is a supplier, who is the customer then?"

As you no doubt have guessed - the principle that I'm talking about is "Supply, Demand and Equilibrium" but in a different perspective.

Malaysia almost made the same mistake by giving out loans and grants (via Banks & Financial Institutions including some Government Agencies) but the businesses they were 'helping' are mostly suppliers/contractors/service providers/sellers etc and not customers. New products, New technologies - everything NEW - mostly claimed to 'assist the Government in their plans' but actually to 'make more money'. (In the end suppliers are flooding the market and not customers)

Again, I'm not implying that the business plans submitted didn't take into account the target market a.k.a. the customers but I'm just looking at the facts.

In laymen term, the customers at the point where borrowings were provided to the suppliers or sellers - are either :

a) loosing their purchasing powers quite rapidly.
b) Or did they have too many suppliers to choose hence, they thought of one good idea -
c) why not I just keep my money without spending them?

Then the banking and financial institutions have no choice but to increase the rate in order to minimize borrowings. Although this has; in a manner of speaking; helped in the 'rebounding process, - but again, there were little effort to help out the customers to regain their purchasing powers or increase promotion on buying rather than keeping.

The 'rich' customers did spend their money but based on my analysis on people going out for vacationing and business purposes overseas, these customers were spending outside Malaysia!

Despite the tourism industry did spur the growth of tourists coming in assisted by MIDA, MITI etc for prospects of domestic investment or export but nobody really tried to capture how much money Malaysians are spending outside? (Here, I'm referrring to those who did not use MITI or MIDA avenues to invest outside but rather - their own initiatives - perhaps due to some 'smart partnerships' or 'JVs' that were not announced in the medias. Apart from this category, I will not touch on those who used their money for crazy shopping spree or gambling (well..it's their rights)

The other customers? You've heard it all the time :

Those 'customers really loosing the purchasing power' (moderate or poor family) decided to spend their money by saving them or buying only the required consumables may not be able to invest in 'high end investments'.
------------------------------------------
Back to the future : (now)

Old habits never die.

We have experienced above 1000 KLCI achievements and suddenly (as I have said in another topic) the market become erratic. Yes, I did say that Banks and Financial Institutions including relevant Government Agencies should help and I must admit I was a bit wrong in my decision. (when I found out - loans and grants are focussing mainly on Suppliers again - as I speak)

So, how to balance and reach 'equilibrium'? (not necessarily 50%-50% - you can't do that)

I was speaking to a Malaysian friend working in the Middle East. He noticed one remarkable thing...it's not easy to find a 'poor guy or family'..everyone is working or at least doing business, or very rarely he heard that people cannot buy things over there.

Again, I dig further...my friend told me that if there is a poor guy and they got to know about it...two things will be done :

a. Giving him/her a sum of money to cater for himself and family, pay his/her debts/overheads etc.

b. Next, giving him a job with proper training and development so that he too can earn a salary just like everyone else,

c. Alternatively, he will be given (not a loan) a sum of money to open up a business (again with training) if he has interest in any kind of business or accepting suggestions from Government 'experts/consultants'.

(Yes, you might say that the Middle East have abundance of oil and everyone is rich. But this country in the Middle East is a LOT bigger than Malaysia. For Malaysia and its population, we also have enough supply of fuel/oil and abundance of resources for everyone as well..)

I'm not asking too much - all I'm hoping for we can take good examples - how we're going to do it..that is really up to us. I think 'good intentions' must also be there before we do everything.

So conclusion for now....make effort to 'balance up' between the 'sellers' and 'buyers'...you'll see improvements in economy..I guarantee it!

--------------------------------------------
Here's my complaints for the day :

1) Funny, I still see 'genuine poor people' in Gombak who are really scared to ask for help because

a) they are illiterate or

b) been cheated with their ICs 'taken away' by unscrupulous people or

c) too scared to go to Government offices to ask for help or scared of procedures or scared of being chased out and many more.

so where's the 'Wakil Rakyat'? Where's the 'Ahli Parlimen' - don't care 'lah' whether you from BN or BA..just do your work - do not treat these people as 'don't exist'!

2) Funny, for almost 10 years, I still see 'rats' and 'unattended garbages' - if we can't solve these two 'small problems' or start pointing hands to another party - then what more to solve problems of people?