Skip to main content

My Net-worth is in Millions Already!

WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE AMONG MILLIONAIRES? If you are in IT in India, perhaps you already are!

First, some bullet-points about the global and Indian IT industry that got me thinking:
  • Indian Software Industry is approx 66% of Worldwide Software Services
  • Top 6 Indian IT Companies makes of approx. 50% of total Indian IT Industry
  • In terms of sales among these top six (in descending order of reported figures for 2007 - TCS, Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Satyam, and HCL), the first three clocks almost 60%
Now, a Forrester Research forecast reports says that the total Global IT spend (IT industry potential) is projected to be at USD 1.55 trillion in 2007-08.

Wow! A quick back of an envelop analysis reveals some pretty interesting monetarily figures. (above: rather front of the envelop; the back was already taken by the groceries' list...) Enjoy:

Global IT industry at USD 1.55 tn (2007)

66% of it is served by companies in India

50% of which is with the top 6 players of India
i.e. 33% of global IT services business is with 6 Indian cos.

About 7% of Global IT business is with Infosys
and
they have about 70k employee-base

therefore, an Individual net-worth could be 7/70,000 = 0.00001%

applying a multiplying factor* p @ p = 3.5
0.00001% x 3.5 = 0.000035%

net-worth of 0.000035% of Global IT business

my net-worth could be 0.000035% of USD 1.55 trillion
=> USD 1.55 tn x 0.00000035 = USD 5425000
=> approx USD 5.5 million


* To account for the disparity of "value-add" across various levels and roles in a given organization and in the industry at large, let me introduce a 'premium' factor p, which takes into account factors such as experience, longevity and loyalty, value-add-over-tradition, client-relationship-quotient, niche skills/domain knowledge, roles/management abilities, innovations/leadership demonstrations, reputation/recommendations/published papers/blogs etc., I-am-the-best-attitude, and alike.

As the base, a 'pure' and productive software engineer in Infosys would have her contributions to the industry measured at p = 1.

For my p factor, I have considered value 1 for 10 years of industry experience, 1 for effectively delivering in client-relationship and value creation (business development) roles, added 1 to it for venturing into and bringing back 'goodies' from unchartered territories (business development, and successful greenfield projects), and 0.5 for doing more than 3 years at Infosys (longevity and loyalty), which makes my p = 3.5.

And, in terms of the Global IT industry, that brings my current 'Professional' net-worth at USD 5.5 million!

Now, that 'Feels' good!

How much is your worth? Aren't you a millionaire yet!

[For relevant Forrester Research forecast for 2007-08, go here.]
[For the corresponding NASCOMM story of 2007, go here.]
[For
Forbes.com report on Ambani's 'costliest home in the world', go here.]

Edit:
Go here for npr podcast putting "Value On Life" at USD 6.9 million in 2008, which is a depreciation of nearly 11% over past five years.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pygmalion vs. The Golem Effect

There are two kinds of self-fulfilling prophecies. They are broadly defined by wiki as follows: The Pygmalion effect , or Rosenthal effect, is the phenomenon in which the greater the expectation placed upon people, the better they perform. On the other hand is the Golem effect , in which low expectations lead to a decrease in performance. In ancient Greek mythology, Pygmalion fell in love with one of his sculptures, which then came to life. The theme was in the main stray of many English literary works during the victorian era. One of which is George Bernard Shaw's play titled "Pygmalion" from which Rosenthal effect gets its name. In Shaw's play, the protagonist, a professor of phonetics Henry Higgins makes a bet that he can train a bedraggled Cockney flower girl, Eliza Doolittle, to pass for a duchess at an ambassador's garden party by teaching her to assume a veneer of gentility, the most important element of which, he believes, is impeccable speech. (The pl

"Peter Drucker - Managing Oneself" on SlideShare.net

IN THE INTRODUCTORY paragraph of this legendary paper for Harvard Business Review, Peter Drucker writes: We live in an age of unprecedented opportunity: If you've got ambition and smarts, you can rise to the top of your chosen profession, regardless of where you started out.  But with opportunity comes responsibility. Companies today aren't managing their employees' careers; knowledge workers must, effectively, be their own chief executive officers. It's up to you to carve out your place, to know when to change the course, and to keep yourself engaged and productive during a work life that may span some 50 years. To do those things well, you will need to cultivate a deep understanding of yourself - not only what your strengths and weaknesses are but also how you learn, how you work with others, what your values are, and where you can make the greatest contribution. Because only when you operate from strengths can you achieve true excellence. Marking a small foot

HBR: Most Popular Articles of 2010

AN EXCITING YEAR IS DRAWING TO A CLOSE. Coming full circle of seasons it is winter again while the haven freezes over and a friend messaged from Leh in north-western Himalayas, "Its -15.4° C (4.2° F) here. Expect snow typing." I am almost sure it was meant to read "slow typing". HBR on their part collectively published some 1000+ articles over the last 365 days. Recently, one of the editors listed the top 10 most popular articles among them (try  here ). Listed below are the five articles that I liked most. 1. Why I Returned My iPad by Peter Bregman Peter Bregman stands in a two-hour queue-for-a-gadget for the first time to get his hands on iPad on its launch day. And within days, he is hooked. In this I-fear-I-might-loose-boredom post, Bregman talks about returning his iPad to Apple because it was "too good". He writes, "It's too easy. Too accessible. Both too fast and too long-lasting. For the most part, it does everything I could want. W