BW Communities

Case Study: Resentment, Resistance, Revolution

BW Online Bureau Nov 08, 2014

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><root available-locales="en_US," default-locale="en_US"><static-content language-id="en_US"><![CDATA[Kapil Shankar watched as the 52-inch television screen went orange with the flames on Reeves Corner, Croydon. London was burning for the fourth night in a row. Only five days ago, thousands of Syrians had staged a protest march; the military had rolled out tanks into the streets of Hama to put off a four-month-long uprising. It was the anger of the people versus the anger of the rulers. Only days before that, 5,000 people had converged on Cairo's Tahrir Square to protest against their regime's slow pace of change. Yemen's uprising was against unemployment, economic conditions and corruption; Tunisia's Revolution in January 2011 was also protesting unemployment, food prices and corruption. Libya, too, had an angry uprising. As did Algeria over poor housing; and Bahrain over human rights and greater political freedom... Iraq protested in February over national security, demanding an investigation of federal corruption cases, and fairness in public services. In Israel, Palestinians initiated a revolution on Facebook and when 350,000 ‘Likes' were posted. Facebook, fearing it could be culpable of encouraging violence, tore down the page. Funnily, thought Kapil, in most cases, the ruler had amassed huge personal wealth while the people languished under a mountain of rising prices, unemployment, poor or no health care and in some cases extended emergency rule, and oppression. But these West Asian rebels were seeking to overturn corrupt tyrants. What was London's story? London? Its story was not even about democratic governance that the West Asia protestors demanded, but there were similarities that lay under the surface of angry definitions — resentment of the affluent and a hatred of the law enforcers, the cops. Kapil could not help but call to mind India's own uprising led by Anna Hazare, who voiced the people's angst over cascading corruption among the ruling class while farmers committed suicide. And uniquely, the government was looking surprised as it said, "All these things take time... you cannot just ask for all this..." Organisations too were guilty of feeding this disease, thought Kapil. So many like Taffet chased wealth accumulation feeding their people wrong values, driving them to work longer and longer hours, uncaring of the social impact of such excess. Does Anil realise he is feeding the demon? (Aniljeet Daman was Kapil's boss and Taffet's chairman.) This morning, his wife Radhika had read out a line to him from the Gita, "They are social criminals who feed themselves upon social wealth, arrogating it and hoarding the same, for selfish enjoyment regardless of the privations and poverty of the unfortunate in the community or country. It is said that such hoarders of wealth eat but sin." "What about those who watch all this but are unable to do anything, Radhika?" asked Kapil. She was startled. "What is the matter, Kapil?" she asked, not sure of what ailed her husband. Kapil had been disturbed over the recklessness at Taffet India where he was the HR head. Worse, he had been Anil's right hand for over six years. The relationship with Taffet and Anil began extremely well, and, in fact, continued to be so as a relationship. But Kapil's mind had begun to detach. In the past 4-5 years, he had come to sense and see for himself the rampant breach of respect for employees, systems, law and ethics. Now it had reached a stage where Anil even thumbed his nose at his dissenters in his quest for money and even more money. Kapil had believed that he should, would and could change Anil's heart and mind. But in the past four months, he had kicked himself and declared that he was being utterly foolish to even imagine all this. break-page-break The sum total of my 6-7 years has left me with a deep sense of exhaustion. As a champion of people development, respect for the human resource, etc., I do not subscribe to his world view. His haphazard way of working, flouting rules, quest for profits over process and product, complete lack of commitment to institution building... I know the relationship must end now. I cannot be in a situation where my whole purpose is in the control of another. It is not good for him or for me.... HR was a religion for Kapil. He knew the value of an exit interview and always ensured managers openly chatted with him before leaving. For him, feedback was a valuable tool for organisational evolution. Convinced that he needed to talk, Kapil fixed a time for lunch with Anil to speak his mind on the issues that were not going well at Taffet and the prime drivers that had made this decision to quit imperative. When they met at the Chambers, Anil had laughed, "So is this about that exit interview then? What is supposed to happen, hahaha..." Kapil: C'mon Anil, I have made you sit through so many exits, but this time let me tell you what is the soul behind an exit; good for you to know the text book version. It is a confidential process where an independent and an unbiased individual listens to the feedback of an exiting employee in a structured manner and yet maintains and gives space so that, as far as possible, truth is spoken so that it can be used for improving the organisation so that perpetuity can benefit. It also helps in building bridges with an exiting employee so that he or she feels respected and has the potential to be a good ambassador for the organisation.  Anil: Interesting… And we do this for all people who leave? Kapil (surprised): Yes, Anil. You cannot forget your exit with Navneet Kalra on product design. Anil: Oh, the fellow who complained that I was ‘copying'? Kapil: He meant much more… Anil: He was free to tell me how terrible I am. I was aware he would not discuss my virtues. Kapil: Anil, let us pass that for now. This meeting is about you and me. And unlike most of our other conversations, this one will be formal. And we will openly debate so that the organisation benefits. Although I have asked to leave, it is out of self-preservation, not hatred; dislike and discomfort, yes, but not enmity or antagonism... my feelings for the organisation cannot change as, having nurtured it for 6-7 years, I can't stop caring for it. I know every nook and cranny of this organisation.   "You are an owner; it is difficult for me to fathom what ownership of assets and business is. As a professional, I own the tenets of organisation growth in the context of people resources. Therefore, protecting that and preserving that is akin to my nature. "I came to Taffet despite my mentors then telling me that this was not the place for me. They said nothing will change. But I was determined that I would be able to do for the organisation all that was good for it. I know we have built a big business and a big opportunity, but I see that fundamentally, not much has changed." Anil: You surprise me. We have changed everything. I am very open and supportive of processes and policies, you know that... Kapil: I agree, Anil. But do our subsequent actions point to that? Do people at large feel that? I don't...  Sometimes when I look at the state of things, I feel I have done nothing. If a sound HR professional were to audit the adherences of holy cow HR tenets here at Taffet, he will find serious breaches. For example, can business profile, size, penetration and depth change without change in our attitude to the resources that enable that? Like mass retrenchments and replacements? Your abrupt decision to shut down a core business because you got a good buyer... without warning people that you were likely to. Is that fair? Is there any attempt at inclusivity? At enabling learning and growth? Anil: It is natural to feel like that. When business grows at the pace we do, the dynamics do boggle the mind. I don't need to tell you this... Yes, we have to keep business going. Sometimes there are situations. But I don't see conflicts, as long as my actions are intended to serve the larger purpose. So, if I have to ask some people to go, it is because I am protecting so many other jobs. Is that not good? Kapil: How can that decision be made in isolation? Then again, whose conflicts don't you see, Anil? Your own? That is good and points to a steadfastness of purpose. But do you see the conflicts of the people? Both with regard to what they feel about the organisation's ethos evolving as well as about their functional finesse? As a leader you are expected to have that third eye to see all that. What ‘purpose' do you talk of? Business purpose? Your individual entrepreneurial purpose? Or your inner purpose, to which employees may not have subscribed? I do not recall you ever sharing your purpose with the people... do you know if all the members of the top team feel like you do? Do we have a shared understanding of that? Did you make an attempt to do that? I asked you this many times. But you didn't find time.... Anil: I am surprised this is becoming an issue now. Sure, but you know how we were all working to build the business. Shared understanding and all that, Kapil... these are theoretic, please! I know the great HR masters write copiously about all this, but the pace does not allow time for that, you know that! What do you want me to do? Stop the business for a day and share understanding and purpose? And please remember that if we don't have business, we cannot have employment. Kapil: That is the point. While we can all justify that we genuinely didn't have time, you also know that if there is something we value very much, we always find time. Face it Anil.... A deep and thick silence followed. Anil understood what Kapil was saying, yet he felt either the man was labouring a non-existent point or he himself was missing it. He said, "At one level, I wish to understand your angst. I do wish to see what is it, which, if I had done differently, you would have stayed. But I am not sure if I understand your issues. What is the core issue, Kapil?" Kapil: The issues of letter and spirit. Anil: What do you mean? Am I doing things illegally? Kapil: Please don't get me wrong. Many a times we can respect law in letter, but forget the spirit behind it. Many things are done by humans in trust. Even in difficult times, we should remember that and reciprocate not only in letter, but also in spirit. We should have accommodated some of the issues that arose on account of ‘spirit' even if they had some cost to it... Anil: Like? Kapil: Like helping people attrite when we wished to downsize and did too. We should have accommodated some costs. Given people time... These are costs of doing business. And to me it makes business sense too, because people who leave will have no ill-feelings. Like customers, even people are our ambassadors. Anil: Aren't you speaking like a trade union leader? You are a professional and in business. The business of business is business. Where is the place for emotion? Ill-feelings, etc., are not germane to business! Business requires a tough heart, Kapil. It is not with ‘feeling' that I have raised such an empire! Kapil: I agree with you. But business is also about people, customers, society... the stakeholders who bring soul to business. We draw all our resources from society's people and we need to have meaningful conversations. I ask you, Anil, did you even have a conversation? Anil: I am the chairman and I take the decisions I have to in the larger interest of people. I know HR is all about people, their feelings,  happiness, etc. That is why you are there. You have to do all this. I cannot get my hands into all this. People can ask potentially difficult questions, and then how do I field them? That is why you are the filter! Instead you are doing vakaalat for them! And sorry... there is no time for all this, please think like a business head, not like an HR man. Kapil: I can see your frustration, but having felt it, now deal with it. Because what you have to do, you have to do. It may be a pain, it may be time-consuming, but it is the soft investments that you make in your business. You say, ‘that is what you are here for'... Exactly. And because I am here, I have been telling you what you need to be doing! What do you think is going on in Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Tunisia... and in India? Does that send out a message about why people are important? You don't deal with people because they are important. You deal with them because finally you are here for the people. Anil, the whole world is in trouble for exactly this reason... because a few people made use of the rest of mankind to amass wealth; a few people ignored and disrespected the needs of most people...  and now your beloved England too! It is not about sophistication, it is about duty. When we ask people to go, we should do it with respect and compassion. We should not take abrupt decisions and also make people feel as if they are not wanted from tomorrow. Exit is a process we need to manage extremely well, and with the attitude to help them re-settle. It is inhuman to hand over envelopes on a 31st with a note inside that says, here are your dues, do not come from tomorrow... I told you, don't do this. But you went ahead and did it through the line management — it was heartbreaking. This is what I mean about spirit... Anil: So tell me more about your letter and spirit protest. Open it for me. That is something that is intriguing… Leave out the business of people, inclusion, etc. What else? Kapil: The law asks us to appoint a board of directors. What are we using them for? So, the spirit... how do we leverage them? Do we involve them in open discussions on real issues, and openly too, and thus use their expertise? Or do we just call them for meetings, serve them Lipton chai and Marie biscuits and write minutes? break-page-break Next, how are we developing people for taking on new roles? There is a succession plan that I developed for you... but when will you allow it to be implemented? What about issues of work-life balance? Do we ever celebrate successes? Do we ever have fun with all people as family? Anil: This point I buy. I do want us to involve and have a very robust board participation. But we must retire them all and get a new set in for that. The current set actually comes for the hamper only! So this is something I endorse. Also people as family... haanh, karna chahiye. But yaar Kapil, these emotional things are not my cup of tea. I cannot ho-ho-ho with employees... I admit I have this difficulty. Kapil: You only need to be yourself, no role playing is needed! Let me take you back to one instant which caused a lot of people a lot of grief. Last year, you decided to sell the home appliances business because you wanted to get into telecom. For 14 months you primed and preened and pruned the business, adding little bells and whistles and preparing it. I had a viewpoint on that, remember? Anil: Yes, I remember my dear man. You wanted me to sell it as is, whereas I needed to prepare it to present it. You thought I was dressing it up, I thought I was getting it ready to be presentable. In business, nobody buys a bad looking product! Kapil: And thus we will play with semantics, Anil, but artificially fluffing up sales, creating a market buzz at a phenomenal cost, when the other businesses were starved... what is that? And I am not even talking yet about the dressing up of the balance sheets and the profitability statements. But let that be. My biggest grouse was people. <img src="/businessworld/system/files/case_study_2_200x200.jpg" width="200" height="200" style="float: right; margin: 5px;">It was necessary and fair to let them know the business was being sold. The market for new jobs was already drying, they would need time to scout for a new job. We had a very amenable way to share the news with them such that the business would not suffer. I even said we will share with them a portion of the sale price in the form of bonus if they stay on to keep servicing the business till it was sold. But you chose silence, Anil. Not just me, even the Board felt it was necessary to take the top team into confidence. So we had a boiling conflict. How do leaders resolve conflict? By having a dialogue with the leadership team — a free-flowing and engaging dialogue. That is how alignment with values — or the lack of it — will surface. Then we have a means to resolve conflicts. Anil: Kapil, conflicts are resolved by leading teams to reach a common ground from which to view business. But when cultures are not understood, common ground can become elusive. In our case, you need to understand the culture of the company I have nurtured: it is based on hard work, smart decision-making, the ability to beat competition using native intelligence, watching my back, and the desire to keep growing. You see anything wrong with that? Anything unethical? I don't. I have my values — pretty firmly in place too — and I would like to work with those who are aligned with my values. Mind you, I don't want to change the world. As in I don't want to change you and the other people who disagree with my values. You are entitled to your values and ways. I want to find those who agree with my values and work with them. casestudymeera(at)gmail(dot)com Classroom Discussion Every employee's contribution triggers profits. What makes it impossible to recognise this? (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 12-09-2011)