I overheard someone commenting about a new ad campaign that had hit the TV with the IPL. Barely anybody would have missed it. The ZooZoo Ad from Vodafone. The person "bet her job"; that the ad was an animation and not a live shoot. The discussion went into an even more tangle when she was challenged and the only way to justify the argument was her years of experience and the fact that she was so closely associated with the brand... well the discussion didn't end over there... a little enquiry later it was clear that the ad was an actual shoot. But surprise surprise, the impulse bets and the overt justifications just disappeared into thin air...
I have always been wondering in some corporate set ups how can one bet based on his likes and dislikes and not have an argument on plain-simple facts. why should egos always play a large role on 'why I am more important than the rest of you'.
This stems from the insecurities that creep up in an corporate environment. The need to be recognised and far outshine your colleagues.
But the question even then remain is on why should you lie or put your credibility at stake, just to prove a point that doesnot benefit your work anyways?