EVOLUCIÓN DE LA TECNOLOGÍA FLEXNET

Location: Bengaluru

PROFILE:

OA Percentile - 99.90 Class X - 87.2% Class XII - 90.6%

Undergrad - B.E. from P.E.C. Chandigarh in Electronics & Electrical Communication (2006 passed out) - 66.85%

Work-ex - 20+ months in IT Services @ Noida Interview @ IHC , New Delhi - 20/3 - 1400 hours- The process goes like this:

GD:

10 minutes to read a case + 20 minutes to discuss in which one of the member has to summarise the

discussion (member has to be chosen by the group) + 10 minutes to fill a form which comprises of summary of the discussion, most influential person from 20th century in your opinion and why, lastly your career goals and where does PGP from IIMB fits in?

My case was about a ban by the Union Health Ministry on scenes in movies which depict smoking and therefore, the movie fraternity was pissed off at this... there were questions that why not go ahead and curb the tobacco production...

we had to discuss whether the ban was right or not? And should tobacco production be curbed?

Now, 20 minutes is simply awesome! no one was bothered whether he/she will get a chance to speak or make a contribution...It was a good discussion discussing how the ban limited the creative freedom of the

moviemaker and a blanket ban was not desired...then we discussed that curbing the tobacco production is also not feasible as the govt. has vested interests in it...farmers, corporate all angles were brought in...And awareness in the society and making film fraternity as an ally in the fight against tobacco were seen as possible solutions...

My performance:

started the GD and introduced the case...a few points here n there...then introduced the tobacco industry wala aspect...raised a few questions...and when around 17-18 minutes had passed kinda summarised the discussion and asked the group to come up with more suggestions to implement the solution...

on more thing...there was one guy out of us 9 who didn’t speak even a word...towards the end, I asked the group to take his inputs....the group responded well and even the guy made one decent point...I don't know how it works with the GD protocol but I went with my gut feel...

decent performance I would say!

PI:

I was the first one!

P1: Old Lady Prof P2: Young Male Prof

P1 had my application form with her!

P2: So Sumit, how would a friend describe you?

P2 then asked questions on how would you go about resolving a conflict between two friends...I specifically mentioned that I am normally quite objective in my opinions and then I was all blah blah about getting to the root cause, hearing people out, providing them with a vent to let out what was bothering them and

understanding each other's perspectives...

P1 then asked me to explain my job profile which I did decently

P2: Tell me one creative work that you have done in your job.

Me: told about the logo competition that I won and it was selected to be used as the logo of our project... P2: Do you know what IIMBs logo means?

Me: recalled that it says 'Tejasvina Vadhi Tamastu' and told them thatit was also a part of my prayer at

Kendiya Vidyalaya...and as far as I remember, it means - "take me from this darkness to enlightenment"...don't know the exact meaning though!

P2: nodded. (So I thought I was close to the exact meaning.)

P1: noted that I had mentioned about two awards for team work during my workex...gave a few situations

and asked me how I would go about resolving/managing them...

Me: built upon the 'objective' quality of mine and gave relevant examples from my extra-currics and work-

ex...

This discussion revolved a lot about understanding people...so P2 then tells me about People Quotient and asks me how should I judge your PQ?

Me: I tell him that a group activity would be perfect for it...and that would give you good insight to how I

perceive others and how am I received by them... P2 nodded...

then P2 mentioned that we agree with your idea of conflict resolution at micro level...but what do you think of how US goes about taking decisions in Nuclear power and energy sector wrt other countries?

Me: I said that in earlier cases I was assigned with the role of achieving the task...on the other hand, nobody

has assigned US that role...brought up UN and how it should be the right medium for such decisions...

P2: but then reality is different!

Me: agreed and then substantiated how UN can be more assertive and should have done something when US

went against its wishes and attacked Iraq...

P2: Do you believe in majority? Me: Yes, sir.

P2: then what about the minority rights?

Me: Explained that decision-making bodies are in existence because of this...related the quality of 'being

objective' to this and said that even if 80% agree to harm the rest 20%, it's not right...

P2: but that is majority by numbers...what about when u vote and stuff?

Me: I didn’t get the difference but explained taking Ganguly's example...that 95% junta would have said that

he would not come back in the team but he did and scored good runs in both formats of the game! So, majority based o baseless reasons or emotions should not matter...the majority should have good reasons to back itself!

And then Thanks You's & Good Byes!