Venue: SIOM G-10

Blood donation camp was organised by Sinhgad Institue of Management under the supervision of Shri Kashibai Navale hospital on 3rd of March, 2016.The camp was inaugurated by Dr.Parag kalkar director SIOM. As a humanitarian cause, SIOM organizes such camps quarterly to promote the same. It was scheduled from 10:00am to 5:00pm.Students enthusiastically participated in the camp both from SIOM and outside SIOM .Faculty coordinator involved in the event were Prof.Umesh Gramopadhye supported by the MBA 1st year students.


Technology and Sustainable growth By Dr Devidas Golhar

Technology and Sustainable growth   by Devidas Golhar


Ongoing changes in economic structure are important to sustain growth. At lower per capita GDPs, the diversification of economic structures reduces volatility and makes positive growth episodes last longer. As economies develop, services become much more important, but even at higher per capita incomes, manufacturing interacts with services to maintain growth’s momentum. What is clear in all this is that the structure of the economy matters for the ability to sustain growth. Technological change drives structural transformation by generating a continuous flow of new products and productive activities, as a result of which new sectors emerge and old ones shrink that have become technologically obsolete. Technological changes in production processes result in rapid productivity increases, which—in interaction with changes in demand— result in dramatic transformations in the structure of production. The productivity gains driven by technology reduce employment in some sectors and liberate resources that can be employed elsewhere in the economy. The classic example is agriculture, of which the employment share has been declining across the globe.

Courteous Expressions? by Dr Sadhana Choukkar

Courteous Expressions?

In addition to expressing and communicating about Reality, language can superimpose or create reality. It can also imply or add to reality. Along with the explicit message there is a constant interplay of message due to sub text and Meta effects of the words or short forms used. The SMS culture has promoted the usage of short forms [abbreviations – both standard and non-standard] like never before.

It always helps to edit what one want to express especially in the written mode where, punctuations if misplaced are noticeable, and can alter or distort meaning. One has to be even more careful while using short forms and Acronyms when dealing with emotional response or empathic expressions.

For instance, even w.r.t. Whatsapp chats when people get into expressing empathic response or social courtesies, people freely, casually and usually use short form like R I P preceded or followed by the name of the person you are sending condolences to, but inadvertently miss the target almost implying that his very soul rest in peace – like R I P xyz or XYZ R I P or mere R I P. Sometimes event he spelling is carelessly misspelt as piece for peace. Time and again I’ve had to send subtle reminders off Whatsapp.

What about – Tnx, Thnx, T.C., GM or B’day which are all expressions of emotion, how genuine do they sound as short forms. I’ve wondered how much time do you think it takes for the sender to communicate his feeling earnestly? Let’s not reduce these emotion backed epithets to mere formalities devoid of emotion. Interpersonal skills are not just about communication exchanges but message transaction with Humans for Humanity.


by Dr Sadhana Choukkar

TRUMP Trumps Hillary’s Ace by Sadhana Choukkar

TRUMP Trumps Hillary’s Ace

Some inferences:

This is solely the writer’s point of view (not read about any of the analysis so far available post-election). Though much is made of the language used by Trump in keeping with the linguistic elements peculiar to each state as conveyed through “whatsapp” forwards, it is his Will to fight against terrorism and keeping a check on immigrants that won him votes. The larger majority shares similar concerns and don’t really care about Hillary’s broad minded all accommodating approach.

How did he manage this? It’s no surprise if you relook at the recent US election stories – President George Bush won his second term on the basis of the Hunting Metaphors he used to contain terrorism. If one recalls the language he dwelt on, it clearly communicated a merciless and ruthless flushing out of terrorists – “Smoke them out”….. “Hunt them down”…. and the like, which is what got him elected as the President for the 2nd term.

Next descended Obama, who was a change they waited for __ a much younger leader, who could start afresh, and knew too well that personal safety on the physical premise is very dear and close to everyone’s heart. In every speech that he made, he ensured they heard about his zero tolerance for terrorism.

At the end of his first term when he masterminded the military operation to eliminate Bin Laden, he won people’s confidence and had an easy victory in the 2nd term.

Now, in the current US election I don’t think Trump was voted so much for a sense or feel of change but for the zero tolerance he repeatedly voiced for terrorism, which really didn’t find a prominent place on Hillary’s Agenda. This is how Trump struck the right note, by perfectly matching people’s crucial personal priority of physical safety and security.


Sadhana Choukkar

Malthusian Theory revisited: by Samita

Malthusian Theory revisited:

“Thomas Robert Malthus studied the relationship between food production and population growth in 19th century. According to him food production increases at a uniform rate i.e 2,4, 6, 8…so on, while population grows exponentially i.e 2,4,8,16…so on. So to balance the burden of population nature implements“positive checks” like disease, flood, famines etc. Nature does not spare the innocent people. Malthus suggested “Preventive checks” i.e actions implemented by people to avoid contribution in population, which  are better than the positive checks. Since First Five Year Plan India implemented population controlling programmes to reduce the burden on economy. Presently India’s annual population growth rate is 1.2%. If we examine the natural disasters like flood, famine, tsunami, cyclone occurred in India in past few years, we come to the conclusion that the still the  ‘Positive checks’ are more stronger than ‘Preventive checks’ to control the population growth in India.

Good day

Best Regards