top of page

By:

Rahul Kulkarni

30 March 2025 at 3:32:54 pm

Reputation Is the Real Asset

Your reputation is the only KPI everyone tracks without data In a legacy MSME, people don’t follow strategy. They follow evidence of who you are, especially when things get messy. And the evidence doesn’t come from your PowerPoint. It comes from your pattern . Inherited seat:  People will give you initial respect. They’ll still test whether you’re consistent or emotional. Hired seat:  People will judge you faster. Your reputation starts at zero, and every week adds or subtracts. Promoted...

Reputation Is the Real Asset

Your reputation is the only KPI everyone tracks without data In a legacy MSME, people don’t follow strategy. They follow evidence of who you are, especially when things get messy. And the evidence doesn’t come from your PowerPoint. It comes from your pattern . Inherited seat:  People will give you initial respect. They’ll still test whether you’re consistent or emotional. Hired seat:  People will judge you faster. Your reputation starts at zero, and every week adds or subtracts. Promoted seat:  People already know you. Your challenge is different: will you become fair, or will you become “selective”? Different seats. Same truth: your reputation becomes your currency. Credit Test Let me explain this using something everyone understands. In every industrial area, there’s that one supplier who gives credit. Not because he is a charity. Because he knows who pays, who delays, and who creates drama. Two businesses can buy the same material at the same rate. But their terms will be different. One gets 30 days credit with a smile. The other gets “cash only”. Why? Reputation. And reputation is not a speech. It is a track record of small actions: paid on time, even when inconvenient didn’t play games didn’t shout when there was an issue escalated only when needed respected the supplier’s reality That’s how your team sees you too. Why this matters? Here is the war most incoming leaders lose: They think they need one big intervention, one big restructuring, one big system rollout, one big “strictness moment”. But legacy MSMEs don’t change because of one big moment. They change because people decide, over time, that you are predictable enough to follow. In game theory language, your leadership is not a one-time deal. It’s a “repeated game”. Meaning: you meet the same people again and again, and they adjust based on your last move. You don’t need to use the term. Just notice the reality: The same sales head will meet you 30 times. The same factory supervisor will face you in 20 small crises. The same old-guard person will test your tone repeatedly. The same vendor will watch if you stand by your word. In a repeated setting, people aren’t asking, “Is this decision logical?” They’re asking, “What kind of person is this leader? What happens if I trust them?” Robert Axelrod studied this through famous experiments on cooperation. His simple finding – again, in plain language – was: in repeated interactions, cooperation wins when it is backed by consistent, proportionate enforcement. Not softness. Not aggression. Consistency. Leadership Mistake Most incoming leaders swing between two bad extremes: Extreme 1: The nice leader avoids confrontation adjusts every rule for every person “lets it go” to maintain harmony Result: people like you, but don’t follow you. Extreme 2: The strict leader overreacts to first failure makes examples publicly escalates fast Result: compliance for a week, and then smarter avoidance, politics, and silence. Both extremes destroy reputation. Because reputation is built on one thing: people can predict your response. Think of it like a supplier again: If a customer delays once, he doesn’t ban them for life. But he also doesn’t keep giving full credit like nothing happened. He adjusts terms. Calmly. That calm adjustment is the whole point. In an MSME, the leader who wins is not the one who “wins arguments”. It’s the one who builds a reputation for: fairness consistency low drama clear consequences quick forgiveness when behavior improves This is what makes people cooperate without fear. Field Test For the next 30 days, try this rule: Cooperate first + proportional response. Meaning: Start with trust. Give people a clean first chance. When someone breaks the deal, respond but don’t explode. Make the response proportional and visible. Not humiliating. Just clear. If they correct behavior, reset. Don’t keep punishing forever. (The author is a co-founder at PPS Consulting. He is a business transformation consultant. He could be reached at rahul@ppsconsulting.biz.)

Growing Risks Of Cyber Warfare

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

In a shocking series of events, multiple coordinated explosions have rocked Lebanon and parts of Syria, killing dozens of people and injuring thousands. The blasts occurred after explosive devices, hidden inside pagers and other radio communication devices, were detonated. The targeted individuals were primarily members of Hezbollah, with the explosions taking place in densely populated areas, resulting in widespread injuries to civilians, including children.

The devices, mainly pagers, walkie-talkies, and radios, had been in the possession of Hezbollah operatives, who had acquired them months prior, under the assumption they were secure. However, Hezbollah has accused Israel’s intelligence agency, Shin Bet, of tampering with the devices during transit.

According to security experts, Israel’s elite secret cyber warfare unit was behind the attack. This unit, known for its global cyber operations, is also linked to the creation of the STUXnet malware, which was responsible for the failure of Iran’s nuclear power plant. The pagers were rigged with explosive materials in place of a battery, and a relay switch was installed, allowing the explosions to be triggered remotely in a synchronized manner. The result was devastating injuries to the eyes, face, hands, and legs of those carrying the devices.

The incident occurred in Hezbollah-stronghold areas, including the Dahieh suburb of Beirut, southern Lebanon, and parts of the Beqaa Valley, with some explosions also reported across the border in Syria. The blasts overwhelmed hospitals, as hundreds of victims sought medical help for injuries ranging from severe burns to shattered limbs. The intensity of the explosions, far beyond that of ordinary battery malfunctions, indicates a highly sophisticated sabotage operation.

These explosions have not only deepened the crisis in Lebanon but have also raised critical questions about supply chain security, intelligence tactics, and the legality of using booby-trapped electronics in conflict zones.


What Are Pagers, and Why Are They Still Preferred?

Despite being old-school tele communication technology, pagers or beepers are still used in many countries, particularly in critical sectors and organizations. Pagers primarily facilitate one-way communication, pager uses higher frequencies than car radios i.e. 400 MHz band frequency. It also used a very basic type of VHF spectrum. These devices operate in restricted areas to transfer messages, alerts, and information. These devices are considered more secure and harder to trace or track compared to mobile phones, as they only receive messages, similar to a car radio that receives signals without revealing the listener’s identity or location. Additionally, pagers lack features like Bluetooth or GPS, making them more difficult to hack or compromise.

Among their many advantages, pagers are known for their long battery life and durability, making them ideal for continuous use in specific industries. There are an estimated two million active pager users worldwide. Hezbollah began using pagers after Israel successfully assassinated a high-ranking Hezbollah target by hacking his cellphone and precisely targeting him with a missile. Since then, many Hezbollah members have switched to more primitive communication devices, like pagers, to avoid being tracked via the internet.


Are Mobile Phones and Smartphones Similarly Vulnerable?

American and European security agencies suggest that, theoretically, it is possible to alter mobile phones and other smart devices to turn them into explosive devices. However, practically, it is more difficult due to the advanced security systems in modern smartphones. A hacked smartphone may exhibit various signs, such as abnormal temperature changes, slower system performance, unexpected reboots, odd sounds during calls, hung applications, or irrelevant messages and pop-ups, all of which could indicate tampering. These security systems make it more challenging to modify smartphones in the same manner as simpler devices like pagers.


New Security Challenges

The Hezbollah pager explosion serves as a wake-up call for sectors involving critical infrastructure and aviation. In an era where smartphones are network-connected and can be charged wirelessly, the possibility of tampering with batteries or embedding explosives, like HMX, PETN and other type of plastic explosives pose significant risks. During flights, even a minor explosion could result in catastrophic consequences. On the ground, the threat extends to damaging nearby aircraft, equipment, and infrastructure. Airport security may soon impose stricter regulations, potentially banning pagers, walkie-talkies, and radios, much like power banks, which are now restricted on flights. In the future, mobile phones may only be allowed in switched-off modes, placed in lithium-safe bags during flights. Suspicious devices could be handled separately in Faraday-sheet bags to block any network or signal connections.

This incident highlights the growing risks of cyber warfare and the dangers posed by everyday communication devices being exploited for sabotage. It is an alarming call for a nation’s security as the treat of such critical infrastructure being handled by terrorist organisations can compromise the use of day-to-day electronics for malicious activities. As technology advances, so must the protocols for ensuring public safety, particularly in high-risk environments where even the smallest vulnerability could lead to devastating consequences.

(The writer is an eminent cyber and explosives forensic expert. Views personal.)

Comments


bottom of page