The three keys to staying ahead of your to-do list
'Understanding ground realities, developing listening skills, navigating people-related matters and deep process knowledge are critical for informed business decisions. Those early experiences are very dear to me, as they have shaped the person I am today," says New Delhi-based Singhania, 45, Managing Director, JK Tyre & Industries.
A lot of the learning was put into practice when he took over as Managing Director in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. He prioritised the safety and security of the workforce and focussed on sustained operations at the enterprise to get through the difficult times.
'Working with my core team, we de-prioritised business growth in that year, instead choosing to lead with empathy. Overcoming the pandemic as a team helped strengthen our culture to bring agility to our organisation," he says.
Singhania talks to Lounge about mentorship and the importance of good communication.
Who do you consider your mentor?
I didn't have to go too far to find a mentor. My uncle, Dr Raghupati Singhania, CMD of JK Tyre, has been my mentor. I have learnt much from him, including humility, setting and achieving challenging goals, and how to lead. I deeply value his continued mentorship, which has been instrumental in my journey.
One major insight you worked on with your mentor's guidance?
For many decades, we have been driven by the theme of 'Make in India, for India'. A key insight was that with our improved product quality, portfolio and brand strength, we could expand this to 'Make in India, for the World'. With my mentor's guidance, we at JK Tyre decided to make this happen. Over the past few years, we have executed an enterprise acquisition in Mexico, along with technology partnerships in Italy and with IIT Chennai, to now be recognised as an 'Indian-born global tyre company'. There are many miles to go, of course, but I am already proud of the way we have pivoted the company to achieve this.
What does being a mentor mean to you? How do you mentor your colleagues at work?
Being a mentor means empowering others to reach their full potential. For me, open communication, active listening and cross-functional teamwork are keys to workplace success, and I try to inspire my colleagues to adopt these values in their day-to-day lives.
What's your morning schedule like?
Health and fitness have always been the No.1 priority for me, so I start each day with my regular workout regime. It sets a productive tone for the day and helps me prepare mentally for the day ahead.
What are some of the productivity principles you follow that have made your professional and personal life much easier?
Productivity comes from a disciplined and balanced approach to work and life. I prioritise meticulous planning, effective time management and leveraging technology solutions when suitable.
What's the one positive work routine you have developed during the pandemic?
During the pandemic, I ensured continuity of communication with my team through virtual check-ins. I found that these quick reviews helped enhance alignment and boost morale. I have continued this routine ever since, engaging directly, quickly and efficiently. This ensures collaboration and clarity across teams.
Any book or podcast you would recommend about mentorship and growth?
I regularly listen to various podcasts on current affairs and growth, such as BBC Global, Huberman Labs and Dave Asprey. I love reading The Economist magazine end-to-end. I've gained a lot from these and would recommend them for continuous learning.
How do you unwind? Do you pursue any serious hobbies?
I unwind when I am with family and friends. I also spend time regularly in the gym and cycling. These activities help me recharge and maintain a healthy balance.
Also read: Why the office needs to embrace Gen Z's work attitude
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
ED summons Reliance Group brass in loan fraud probe
The Enforcement Directorate has summoned top executives of Anil Ambani's Reliance Group, including Amitabh Jhunjhunwala and Sateesh Seth, for questioning in a ₹17,000 crore loan fraud case. The ED is also set to question bank officials regarding actions taken against Reliance companies that defaulted on loan repayments. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has summoned around half a dozen current and former top executives of Anil Ambani 's Reliance Group for questioning in connection with its probe into alleged money laundering in a ₹17,000 crore loan fraud case. Amitabh Jhunjhunwala and Sateesh Seth are among those summoned, said people in the know. The investigating agency has asked Jhunjhunwala, a former top executive of the group, to appear before it on Wednesday. Seth, who is still among the top leaders of the group, is summoned on Thursday. Both were close aides of Anil other Reliance Group executives have also been ordered to be available for questioning, the people chief Anil Ambani has been asked to appear at the ED headquarters in New Delhi on Tuesday sources said those summoned are suspected to have played key roles in the alleged bank loan fraud ET on Monday reported that the ED will also summon officials of private and public sector banks that had given loans to the Anil Ambani-led Reliance federal agency will quiz the bank officials on the action initiated by them, if any, against Anil Ambani's companies which failed to repay the loans, ET reported."We want to ascertain what action did banks take against the companies which failed to repay the loans taken from them (banks). Did they complain to the police, seek registration of an FIR against the companies or not", a senior official had told ET on the condition of Rs 17,000 crore loans that three Anil Ambani Group companies - Reliance Home Finance Ltd, Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd and Reliance Communications - had taken from nearly 20 private and public sector banks, including Yes Bank ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank , had turned non-performing. The ED is investigating alleged laundering of the loan agency last week carried out searches at multiple entities and individuals linked to the group. Late on Friday, it arrested Partha Sarathi Biswal, managing director of Odisha-based Biswal Tradelink Pvt Ltd Biswal Tradelink is accused of arranging a fake bank guarantee of ₹68 crore for a Reliance Group firm.A Delhi special court has remanded Biswal in ED's custody till August 6.A statement issued by Reliance Group on Friday said "The company and its subsidiaries acted bonafidely and have been a victim of fraud, forgery and cheating conspiracy. The company has made due disclosure on this to the stock exchanges on November 7, 2024."
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
16 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump says June jobs data 'rigged', Wall Street and economists disagree
The monthly jobs report is already closely-watched on Wall Street and in Washington but has taken on a new importance after President Donald Trump on Friday fired the official who oversees it. Trump claimed that June's employment figures were "RIGGED" to make him and other Republicans "look bad". Yet he provided no evidence and even the official Trump had appointed in his first term to oversee the report, William Beach, condemned the firing of Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labour Statistics appointed by former President Joe Biden. The firing followed Friday's jobs report that showed hiring was weak in July and had come to nearly a standstill in May and June, right after Trump rolled out sweeping tariffs. Economists and Wall Street investors have long considered the job figures reliable, with share prices and bond yields often reacting sharply when they are released. Yet Friday's revisions were unusually large -- the largest, outside of a recession, in five decades. And the surveys used to compile the report are facing challenges from declining response rates, particularly since COVID, as fewer companies complete the surveys. Nonetheless, that has not led most economists to doubt them. "The bottom line for me is, I would not take the low collection rate as any evidence that the numbers are less reliable," Omair Sharif, founder and chief economist at Inflation Insights, a consulting firm, said. Many academics, statisticians and economists have warned for some time that declining budgets were straining the government's ability to gather economic data. There were several government commissions studying ways to improve things like survey response rates, but the Trump administration disbanded them earlier this year. Heather Boushey, a top economic adviser in the Biden White House, noted that without Trump's firing of McEntarfer, there would be more focus on last week's data, which points to a slowing economy. "We are having this conversation about made-up issues to distract us from what the data is showing," Boushey said. "Revisions of this magnitude in a negative direction may indicate bad things to come for the labour market." Here are some things to know about the jobs report: Economists and Wall Street trust the data Most economists say that the Bureau of Labour Statistics is a nonpolitical agency staffed by people obsessed with getting the numbers right. The only political appointee is the commissioner, who does not see the data until it is finalised, two days before it is issued to the public. Erica Groshen, the BLS commissioner from 2013 to 2017, said she suggested different language in the report to "liven it up", but was shot down. She was told that if asked to describe a cup as half-empty or half-full, BLS says "it is an eight ounce cup with four ounces of liquid". The revised jobs data that has attracted Trump's ire is actually more in line with other figures than before the revision. For example, payroll processor ADP uses data from its millions of clients to calculate its own jobs report, and it showed a sharp hiring slowdown in May and June that is closer to the revised BLS data. Trump and his White House have a long track record of celebrating the jobs numbers -- when they are good. These are the figures Trump is attacking Trump has focussed on the revisions to the May and June data, which on Friday were revised lower, with job gains in May reduced to 19,000 from 144,000, and for June to just 14,000 from 147,000. Every month's jobs data is revised in the following two months. Trump also repeated a largely inaccurate attack from the campaign about an annual revision last August, which reduced total employment in the United States by 818,000, or about 0.5 per cent. The government also revises employment figures every year. Trump charged that the annual revision was released before the 2024 presidential election to "boost" Vice President Kamala Harris's "chances of Victory", yet it was two months before the election and widely reported at the time that the revision lowered hiring during the Biden-Harris administration and pointed to a weaker economy. Here's why the government revises the data The monthly revisions occur because many companies that respond to the government's surveys send their data in late, or correct the figures they have already submitted. The proportion of companies sending in their data later has risen in the past decade. Every year, the BLS does an additional revision based on actual job counts that are derived from state unemployment insurance records. Those figures cover 95 per cent of US businesses and are not derived from a survey but are not available in real time. These are the factors that cause revisions Figuring out how many new jobs have been added or lost each month is more complicated than it may sound. For example, if one person takes a second job, should you focus on the number of jobs, which has increased, or the number of employed people, which has not? (The government measures both: The unemployment rate is based on how many people either have or do not have jobs, while the number of jobs added or lost is counted separately). Each month, the government surveys about 121,000 businesses and government agencies at over 630,000 locations -- including multiple locations for the same business -- covering about one-third of all workers. Still, the government also has to make estimates: What if a company goes out of business? It likely will not fill out any forms showing the jobs lost. And what about new businesses? They can take a while to get on the government's radar. The BLS seeks to capture these trends by estimating their impact on employment. Those estimates can be wrong, of course, until they are fixed by the annual revisions. The revisions are often larger around turning points in the economy. For example, when the economy is growing, there may be more startups than the government expects, so revisions will be higher. If the economy is slowing or slipping into a recession, the revisions may be larger on the downside. Here's why the May and June revisions may have been so large Ernie Tedeschi, an economic adviser to the Biden administration, points to the current dynamics of the labour market: Both hiring and firing have sharply declined, and fewer Americans are quitting their jobs to take other work. As a result, most of the job gains or losses each month are probably occurring at new companies, or those going out of business. And those are the ones the government uses models to estimate, which can make them more volatile. Groshen also points out that since the pandemic, there has been a surge of new start-up companies, after many Americans lost their jobs or sought more independence. Yet they may not have created as many jobs as startups did pre-COVID, which throws off the government's models. Revisions seem to be getting bigger The revisions to May and June's job totals, which reduced hiring by a total of 258,000, were the largest -- outside recessions -- since 1967, according to economists at Goldman Sachs. Kevin Hassett, Trump's top economic adviser, went on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday and said, "What we have seen over the last few years is massive revisions to the jobs numbers." Hassett blamed a sharp drop in response rates to the government's surveys during and after the pandemic: "When COVID happened, because response rates went down a lot, then revision rates skyrocketed." Yet calculations by Tedeschi show that while revisions spiked after the pandemic, they have since declined and are much smaller than in the 1960s and 1970s. Other concerns about the government's data Many economists and statisticians have sounded the alarm about things like declining response rates for years. A decade ago, about 60 per cent of companies surveyed by BLS responded. Now, only about 40 per cent do. The decline has been an international phenomenon, particularly since COVID. The United Kingdom has even suspended publication of an official unemployment rate because of falling responses. And earlier this year, the BLS said that it was cutting back on its collection of inflation data because of the Trump administration's hiring freeze, raising concerns about the robustness of price data just as economists are trying to gauge the impact of tariffs on inflation. US government statistical agencies have seen an inflation-adjusted 16-per cent drop in funding since 2009, according to a July report from the American Statistical Association. "We are at an inflection point," the report said. "To meet current and future challenges requires thoughtful, well-planned investment ... In contrast, what we have observed is uncoordinated and unplanned reductions with no visible plan for the future. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
China's 996 workweek is knocking on America's door: Is Silicon Valley falling for the 70-hour grind?
(Representative image) There was a time when Silicon Valley served a dream on a platter, not just of a technology to revolutionise the world, but of lives built on flexibility, creativity, and a certain renegade freedom. Today, in the fluorescent-lit offices of AI startups from Palo Alto to SoMa, the dream is morphed and has become a subject of mockery. 12 hour shifts and six days a week are becoming the new norm of the American job market. The 21st century opened with the narratives of work-life balance, with beanbags, open offices, and kombucha on tap, it appears the next chapter may be authored in the image of a far more punishing model: China's 996 work culture, 9 AM to 9 PM, six days a week. Once vilified and outlawed in the country of origin, 996 is now knocking on America's doors, looking for a new traction in the heart of its tech frontier. The question isn't whether this trend exists. It does. The question is: What does its rise say about the future of ambition in America? Will Silicon Valley keep championing the employees who trade their sleep and sanity for the sake of so-called progress? A peek into the new reality At Rilla, a San Francisco-based AI startup, there's no pretence. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Stylish New Mobility Scooters Available for Seniors (Prices May Surprise You) Mobility Scooter | Search Ads Search Now Undo The job listing doesn't mince words: 'Do not apply unless you're excited about working approximately 70 hours a week.' It's not just a warning, it's a filter. Meals are provided, Saturdays included. The message is etched in black and white: This is the place where work should be your optimum priority, and is for the ones who breathe hustle. And this story does not end with a single company, but is slowly redefining the very fabric of American work culture, where work is no longer a part of life, but a life itself. 996 isn't creeping , it's charging in What was once the whispered domain of overworked founders is now becoming institutionalised. Google co-founder Sergey Brin recently described 60-hour weeks as the 'sweet spot' for his Gemini AI team. Elon Musk offered a more ruthless ultimatum at X: commit to 'extremely hardcore' work hours or take severance and go. Other startups are less subtle. San Francisco-based Fella & Delilah recently introduced a two-tier system, a 25% salary bump and double the equity for those opting into 996. Just under 10% of staff signed on. Meanwhile, recruiters are adjusting to the new expectations. Adrian Kinnersley, a long-time tech headhunter, reports a surge in companies asking for 996 commitments upfront. He's already registered the domain not as a gimmick, but in anticipation of a job market that no longer hides its demands behind euphemisms like "fast-paced" or "growth-minded." Why now? Why again? The answer to why there is a resurgence of extreme work culture, one has to look beyond office walls, to the geopolitical battle being waged in code and silicon. China's DeepSeek AI recently stunned Western researchers with models rivalling, even threatening, the dominance of OpenAI and Google DeepMind. Silicon Valley, long accustomed to leading from the front, suddenly feels the heat at its back. The reflex is primal: work harder. Work longer. Outbuild. Enter the 996 revival. It's no longer just about building great products; it's about defending America's place in a global AI arms race. British venture capitalist Harry Stebbings, never known for understatement, suggested that even 996 might now be passé. 'China's on 007,' he quipped. 'Midnight to midnight, seven days a week.' For Stebbings, working five days a week builds $100 million companies. Seven days? That's the $10 billion game. It's a mindset that both inspires and alarms, depending on where you stand. The fine print: Dreams vs. labour law The glorification of relentless toil does not come without repercussions. Labour law experts forewarn that numerous companies are operating far outside compliance, especially in California, which boasts some of the strictest protections for overtime, rest, and worker safety. But the law, as always, lags behind the culture. And culture is shifting fast. The truth is, there is less appetite, at least in the Valley, to run the ethos. Investors don't reward moderation. Founders don't get applause for leaving early. And in a climate where Gen Z founders equate sleep with mediocrity, the gravitational pull of extreme work is hard to resist. A warning from the East It's worth remembering: China tried this. It scaled the heights of innovation on the backs of millions of overworked engineers, only to be forced into a reckoning. Burnout, protests, suicides, and eventually, government intervention. In 2021, China made 996 illegal. The social cost had become too high. And now, in a twist almost too ironic to script, the United States is embracing the very culture China deemed untenable. The bigger question: What are we building , and at what cost? Work, at its best, is a vehicle for meaning, progress, and transformation. But when the engine is pushed too hard, too often, even the best machines break down. There is a huge fascination and allure to the narrative that genius only emerges through grind. Silicon Valley has long mythologised its titans, the Jobses, the Musks, the Zuckerbergs, as monks of obsession. But it is one thing to admire their intensity. It is another thing to institutionalise it. What happens when a whole generation mistakes exhaustion for excellence? When working through weekends isn't the exception but the expectation? The race for AI dominance is real. But the deeper race, the one that will shape our culture, our health, our future, is how we define the value of a human hour. If America is to lead the world in innovation, it must ask itself: Is it enough to work harder than China, or must we work smarter too? Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
