*Season 2, Week 3* Analysis Thread - Page 8

Originally posted by: JShukla

I understand how Sona- Dev(they are not Devakshi for me anymore😛) spat is viewed on equal terms. I viewed it as a victim finally standing up to a powerful bully. I am not good with debates or convincing someone with my POV. so will not venture there.

Since this thread is not about debate or convincing, but more about sharing our thoughts with each other, and engaging in productive discussion, you are welcome to share your POV as well, as long as you accept that people may not agree with you, and there is no one right answer.

However, what is the take on firing a poor security guard? ... Just wondering.

That was harsh and unnecessary. But if Dev had the authority to fire him, it's obviously Dev's company which hired him, and it was not really the watchman's job to look out for the other occupants of the building. It certainly wasn't considerate or nice of Dev to fire him, and he did it in a particularly mean way, but I think it's part of the same cuthroat attitude the show is projecting as necessary for business.

Oh and btw, people with no MBA(not even college graduates-Bill Gates), peopel with engineering background(Mr Murthy's Infosys), etc. all make it good in the business world... There are many but don't have the time to quote

I firmly believe a nutritionist can do business and good business at that.

Of course a nutritionist can do business, and Sona has amply proven that. What I wish she wouldn't do, is define her success according to her parity or lack thereof with Dev. She was clearly making a statement to Dev by not giving up the office, and not accepting the 30% profit he was offering her. Dev was ready to end the matter then and there. He treated Sona like any other person who might have bought the building, and offered the profit to acknowledge that he had made a mistake. It was Sona in that instance who decided she wanted to drag it forward by sticking to that location. She knew Dev would put up a fight and make her work life difficult, and I am quite sure her team had scouted out other locations, but she chose to take the path of most resistance. That's a valid choice, but it was defninitely a personal one, not one in favour of her company.

Originally posted by: Samanalyse

Regarding Vicky's position in the company, apart from the formal allocation of shares, I think there is also an informal understanding between Dev and Vicky based on the fact that Dev is the only one who actually makes money. Both of them are well aware of this, and in exchange for the status and income of being a CEO, Vicky sits in Dev's place so that Dev can do his nomad thing. It's a mutually advantageous agreement since Vicky is least interested in working for his daily bread. He only attempted insubordination because he thought Dev wasn't holding up his end of the bargain when he closed the only profit-making part of the company.

I don't think Vicky sold 49% of Dev's company to Sona, just half their office. He brought up the 49% to make the point that he had the authority to be make that decision.

Originally posted by: JShukla

I understand how Sona- Dev(they are not Devakshi for me anymore😛) spat is viewed on equal terms. I viewed it as a victim finally standing up to a powerful bully. I am not good with debates or convincing someone with my POV. so will not venture there.

However, what is the take on firing a poor security guard? ... Just wondering.

Oh and btw, people with no MBA(not even college graduates-Bill Gates), peopel with engineering background(Mr Murthy's Infosys), etc. all make it good in the business world... There are many but don't have the time to quote

I firmly believe a nutritionist can do business and good business at that.

Originally posted by: Samanalyse

Originally posted by: _Payalj_

Business is not about qualification. It is all about temperament. Sonakshi was always too soft hearted and hence Dev's belief that she will not be a successful business person.

No I think he clearly underestimates her capabilities. It has come out in many words recently and even earlier. He continued calling her stupid earlier too. Honest, hardworking, sensible intelligent person can do business. At times people have to harden up a little, but that's in almost all professions.

Dev is an emotionally weak person in front of his family but a very ruthless person when it comes to outsiders and business. .And if we remember earlier even Dev was very compassionate to his employees and they loved him for that. To his competitors, he may be ruthless, etc. Which is fine and good.

Dev has only seen the soft side of Sona's.

I think Sona may not be as soft as earlier but she is still compassionate. And its evident because her employees love her He has not seen that Sona who fired an employee for one mistake.

That reminds me wasn't Sona heartless in her treatment to that employee. the level and financial impact of a mistake depends upon the position one is occupying. Sona's employee was a senior executive.

Yup, that was heartless if it was one mistake. Not sure what that employee did and how much of a mess he had made.

This was a watchman. That employee made a business error. This employee forgot that his first loyalty should be towards his employer.

Hmm, I think a warning and refresher of roles/responsibilities was a better more professional way to handle this.

Originally posted by: JShukla

I did see a lot of debate on this thread without really calling it out as debate, but as discussion😃. Anyways...

Sam , I don't think Sona sticking to her ground any form of war cry. Why back down in front of a bully. Also what's with Dev offering money to steer his way across. I have shared with Rekha how Sona's team could have zeroed in on that office space and why it could have been profitable. I feel she is really being calm , matured and respectable. She responds only when provoked badly. I still feel the location is profitable to company in the long run.

Originally posted by: JShukla