Starting to suspect why I'm always intimidated by people who talk econs - it's the vocabulary. I don't think the ideas are all that complex, it's all about a series of ratios after all, but I have a hard time following the ideas because I barely have any clue what the terms mean. Starting to wish I had some background in this before I actually start having to talk to economics folks. *ulp*

Went down to Haas seeking advice for getting into the Fin. Eng. program. Was told to make an appointment and come back with my CV, resume and maybe a letter stating my interests! Argh! Not trying to get into business school yet, for goodness' sake, just want to know how much math I ought to take! Don't know what to do. Class scheduling deadline is fast approaching and I don't think I can handle building (rebuilding from memory, in fact) a CV and resume now. Fact of the matter is that I haven't done much that is relevant or interesting. By the way, the appointment is supposed to be with the program director. Don't these big shots have flunkies to deal with the likes of me???

Was reminded of something today. I've been insisting that we should all "have pride" in what we do, to try hard, and damn the torpedoes. Someone reminded me of the SAF meaning of pride: "People Rest, I Do Extra" and I can't help but be ashamed that I forgot this simple rule. Going to have to watch my motivations a bit closer from now on - I don't intend to let enthusiasm run away with me again. At the end of the day, it's important to know why we do what we do - because of ought to, or because we think we ought to....

Talked to D last night about scholar-board antagonism. Here's my take: scholars are scared of their boards because the boards have control over them. Moreover, most scholars just want to be left alone to enjoy themselves, sans-interference (I think this is a silly way to work. "Chance favours the prepared mind" after all, so it's always best to know what you need to do). Boards can't relate to their scholars because of age and culture gap (especially because it's usually a mid-level administrative officer overseeing the scholars, not a future peer) There's also, I think, a fear of getting personally close to another person because you may not like them but have to deal with them often. (This breeds distance. Whether it's professional or not depends on the individuals) At the end of the day, scholars and their boards simply don't see eye-to-eye. The scholars see themselves as "stuck" rather than part of an organisation. Similarly, the boards expect to integrate the scholars seamlessly even though there are all these differences in viewpoint that have not been dealt with. Scholarship boards expect a batch of brilliant, elitist prima donnas and that is precisely what they get. It's all in the way the system's set up, from selection, to university life to treatment in the workplace.

I can't propose "team-building" exercises as a solution to this issue simply because such activities always seem hollow and artificial - like being forced to smile at someone you hate. There has to be a genuine outreach from both sides, an attempt to come to terms with a rather bizzarre relationship - an employee who feels he has no guarantee of his place in the organisation (and feels he's trapped there), and a work environment where the general feeling is of being saddled with a strange diva from abroad.