We have seen the tata docomo ad: A college kid is being interviewed, and has negative answers to all the positive questions, yet lands up with an offer..so you “hear what you want to hear” goes the tagline. Though it may be too far fetched, I was wondering why in the world could a perfectly rational person choose to offer the useless kid a job? The only plausible explanation I could fathom was; the interviewer was amused.

We have seen similar stories doing the rounds in the form of chain mails, the candidate gets a spot offer at Infosys because he could entertain. And I have heard this number of times, ever since the time I used to dread interviews.

Does it not hold true in the real world? We remember people who have made a difference in our lives, but we have an instant recall for the person who entertained us, without doing anything substantial in our lives. We have movie stars who are popular because they belong to the entertainment industry, we have seen the small screen grow from drama to reality show, not to mention Navjot Singh Sidhu’s career from a cricketer to a cricket commentator (which has about 2% of sport).

‘Breaking the ice’ is often used by executives while addressing an apprehensive audience. And by breaking the ice, it implies telling something that tickles the brain and casts a strong impression. And these are the ones who are most successful, along with the ‘good’ things they have. One who can cheer is considered more approachable, and bosses interact with them more, since they want a break from monotony.

I was reading an article on school teachers and basketball players (it has references to US, but equally applicable to India). It said that school teachers had a much nobler role than the latter, but they do not get paid owing to their inability to reach a large audience. Of course, the fact that they can thrill the audience also plays a huge role.

Take any successful person: chances are that they are great entertainers.

Self development should also focus on entertainment, shouldn’t it?