Kalpana Dixit thought very deeply about all that had happened in the last three days. One interview that was unpleasant, followed by one telephone call with her batchmate Suresh Timappa that was startling in what it revealed. Kalpana felt it was time to call a spade a spade. She was going to resort to legalese to teach the world that an interview was not a social event.Kalpana’s story: Kalpana was a VP with an MNC bank. All was well until she had a baby (Read: ‘This Laptop Does Not Sync’ and ‘The Hand That Rocked The Boat’. Suddenly a manager who had just been lauded and praised and promoted was in the dog house. Sundari Prakash, her boss, belittled her, doubted and questioned her. Her year-end rating was downgraded, insensitive talk about women and childbirth did the rounds, Kalpana’s clients were sought to be reallocated and a bank that had claimed in its corporate ads to be ‘gender sensitive naturally’ was suddenly displaying strange bedside manners.Prakash graduated from mean to vicious. When Kalpana returned to work on the promised date, she was to find that her passwords and access codes had been disabled, her logins deactivated, and her work taken away. Kalpana Dixit was moved to ‘special projects’. Prakash had declared Kalpana inefficient, irresponsible and incapable. And before she knew, she was also sacked on grounds that her job was now redundant.This did not make sense, Sundari Prakash had hired two senior managers at Kalpana’s level just three months ago. The VP HR, Vilas Pandit, her contemporary, was called to deliver her termination letter. When questioned, he had said it was the recession, US was unable to pick up losses... Kalpana: You are lying, Pandit, because between January and March, you hired two new senior managers in my function, at my level! They couldn’t be working for free? Sundari told my clients that I would not be able to work after a baby and introduced them to new CRMs!sundari left the room when artlessly Pandit said, “We have consulted our lawyers and while we cannot legally sack a lady manager during her maternity leave, she can be sacked after she resumes.”So, they had waited for her to resume. And artless as they were Pandit told her, “You can also consult your lawyers....”Kalpana wrote to the global chairman, and asked, “How does this corroborate your ‘women employee friendly policies’? How can this Bank, which prides itself as ‘one of the few organisations high on gender diversity, with women in top management roles’, explain away the fact that they have sacked a VP who has been with them for eight years and have nothing coherent to say for that?”Nothing exceptional happened. ‘We will do a proper investigation and the guilty will not be spared’ they swore, but they were relieved to have Kalpana out of their hair. As for Kalpana, once she decided it was over she did not look back. She reasoned “Sustaining a value at all costs requires intellectual honesty... either you have it or you don’t.” And Geffel Stace Bank, she realised, did not have it.Nuts and bolts was this: Geffel Stace Bank and Prakash waffled over why they had sacked her. Between redundancy, US recession and her discomfort with Kalpana’s motherhood status, the reason remained lost. Inefficiency or incapability or incompetency could not even be a thought, for Kalpana’s appraisals were stellar. Her clients were completely happy with her.Her family prevailed upon her to think of the infant who trusted her to give him her all. “There will always be enough time to get even,” her brother said, and Kalpana agreed. Recently, her batchmate Suresh Timappa had a new job opening at Cyben Pharma, where he was operations director. Fielding for her, he presented her capabilities to Akrur Johri, the financial advisor at Cyben. Cyben was setting up a child health unit as part of their CSR to which they would transfer funds for village health care and cancer care for children. The funds needed to be invested sensibly in mobile hospitals and trauma care units or in income earning securities for the CSR unit. Suresh presented Kalpana’s skills in investing showing Johri how she fitted the bill.Johri asked for a meeting to be scheduled. Yet when Kalpana sat before him, Johri barely went beyond asking her how she was. But given his 67, Kalpana reckoned it was an elderly, old world elegance thing. But then Johri talked. He told her what was on his mind. “Ours is a very tough environment and we have never taken women for this function. For this very reason that women do not have the mental or physical make up for this....”This was when Kalpana began to be confused. “You surprise me, Mr Johri. If you do not plan to hire women, why have you called me for this meeting?”Johri (laughing patronisingly): This is the quality we want, dynamic, bold, ... spitfire...Kalpana (blandly): I don’t understand. What is the purpose of this meeting?Johri: I know how you feel. But women like you should go change the world. It is unfair to women who want to work. Only the other day I met Sushmita Rajan, a chartered accountant from Denver Caloise. I had to tell her the same thing.Kalpana: That is very nice, Mr Johri. Maybe I should be leaving? Johri: Then I must also tell you... Geffel Stace Bank did not have laudatory things to say about you. ... Your ex-boss specifically. Kalpana stopped in her tracks and looked at Johri. A trifle surprised and a little outraged at the sudden yet brazen manner of Johri, not to mention the shock of hearing the revisitation of her ex-boss Sundari in her life. A wave of humiliation swept her, almost instantly replaced by defiance. No, she was not giving Johri the joy of disturbing her. She needed to try that much.Kalpana: Well, the person you got the reference from was my boss and I don’t want to say anything about her or her employers. Suffice it to say that there was a difference of opinions, nay, of values. That said I believe the choice is now yours. I will not engage with you any further till you have had a chance to think. Have a good day.And Kalpana left Johri’s office. break-page-breakOn her way home, Kalpana called Suresh and shared what happened.... “I don’t know what you told him, Suresh, but he is confused. It appears he does not wish to hire women. But he also has some feedback from Geffel Stace that has clouded his perceptions.Suresh (groaning): We had a very long discussion about your candidature. Everything was on the table! I don’t know why he is waffling now. Leave this with me. I will find out.The story that Johri revealed over lunch shocked Suresh. “I have friends in places,” said Johri. “One such is her ex-boss at Geffel Stace, Sundari. She tells me that Kalpana lacks toughness, that she took ill several times during her pregnancy! We cannot hire such a person! She comes across emotional like women are, you know... her ex-boss said she was seized by emotional imbalance, breakdowns during her pregnancy....this is definitely high risk, if you ask me! She said Dixit went about writing to HR and then to the Chairman... already sounds like an unpleasant person. This is why I say, women are emotional...!”Suresh was now very angry. He said to Johri, “Bosses have selective memory. They forget their own trespasses, but uniquely remember everybody else’s. But leave that be, tell me, is that referral about Kalpana from HR?Johri: No, no... I just happened to ask Sundari on the golf course. We were teeing off, you know, randomly I told her that one of Geffel’s VPs had applied to us. Sundari then told me a lot...she does talk! Ha ha!Suresh: You are talking too, ha ha. Ok, I should go now. But let me leave you with a thought. Cyben has sound HR practices and this is not the way we take referrals. How a reference is taken is important. If referral is taken casually, over a corridor conversation, teeing off... that is both unprofessional and unfair to the candidate. Is that how little you value a candidate, a hiree? HR always takes references on 360 basis and from more than one source. That is when it is unbiased and dependable. Yes, some HR and line managers also go for the anecdotal referrals... but responsible hiring needs facts, Mr Johri, not hearsay.Johri: And you have facts?Suresh: At least I do not stand in the golf course and gossip.suresh left in a huff wondering why Cyben continued to keep Johri.He called Kalpana after he reached home and shared all this. “Yes it does appear Sundari has gossiped. And Johri loves gossip. Your ex-boss’ rambling has only convinced Johri that his worldview about women is right!”Kalpana met Maadhurya Virkar, her friend and a senior HR consultant to bounce off some thoughts.Kalpana: If I was incompetent, inefficient, I will accept Sundari’s blather. But Sundari and HR’s claim was that my role was redundant. Now she says I was emotionally imbalanced. I think one’s position as a boss is one of importance and responsibility. Sundari Prakash now needs to know this legally that her conduct has been irresponsible. The golf course cannot sanctify a thoughtless referral. I need a lawyer.Maadhurya: Lawyer? What are you planning?Kalpana: Tell me, does the Indian law recognise this as a misdemeanour? I am sure it does not. Our laws are usually old fashioned when it comes to women because women are not supposed to protest. Today with women out working and levelling, it is time to have laws for them. Specific laws. (Pause...) Ok, here it is. It is three years since I left Geffel. A responsible boss when asked for a referral would say, “Why don’t you contact my HR, they will give you what you need”. An irresponsible boss will do what Prakash did. Three years and she still uses the same words... why? Why? I really wonder.Maadhurya: Ah, I see. There may not be a law for gender discrimination ... but straightaway it seems to me you have a case for defamation.Kalpana: No! Defamation is too silly and pompous. She has been irresponsible. If you are in charge of people then you need to develop commensurate behaviours. You cannot indulge in loose talk. So. I am not talking just about women who are aggrieved but also women who are in positions of authority without commensurate behaviours. What grounds are available to me, in your opinion to make this a legal issue?maadhurya pondered. She could see that one more unique situation had cropped up, involving the right of the woman to be respected and once again the law was silent. She said, “I would say push for ‘constructive dismissal’ – this is when the organisation contrives an environment so that the person has no option but to leave the organisation. I don’t think India has this provision – and it will be a good legal angle to take. Sundari’s behaviour then was a calculated move to oust you and her behaviour today, such as enlisting the vote of Johri to keep you out of a job, is an extension of that. Hence constructive dismissal. Let me introduce you to Onil Das, a good legal advisor friend. See what he can do for this case...Kalpana: Constructive dismissal is – from what I recall – applicable where an employee is forced to leave through calculated acts of the employer. Here, Geffel Stace Bank sacked me. How do I bring a charge for constructive dismissal? Maadhurya: Why not? India needs new laws for women in the workplace. What we also have in India is a lot of vengeful behaviours towards employees. As I see it, they had calculated every move to ensure your dismissal. By claiming your job’s redundancy they had left no option for you. In fact, by rendering your job redundant AND sacking you, they have axed their feet.Kalpana: You know, I am not thinking anymore of having lost my job. That chapter is closed. But I see Prakash has not closed that chapter... she keeps reviving it, that is unprofessional. The entire sacking drama was initiated by her. My point is: If you sacked me because my job was redundant, what the hell were you up to gossiping with Johri about my ‘emotional’ nature? Onil took a few days to read up on Kalpana’s case. Then he agreed to meet Maadhurya with Kalpana. Onil: Many of the acts perpetrated in this case are calculated to cause humiliation and frustration, such as arbitrarily rendering her job redundant without there being a definite cause; HR’s Pandit claiming US recession does not even make economic sense. Then again changing her job description in her absence, reallocating her clients to others, spreading information to Kalpana’s clients that she is likely to quit, tantamount to rumour mongering. And most important here is forcing her to work in conditions ignoring health and safety to both herself and her baby ...Maadhurya: Sorry? Which one is this? break-page-breakOnil: Oh, I have these notes from the note you sent me. Soon after her C-section Madam Prakash sent Ms Dixit an SMS asking her to commit if she will work as efficiently now as she had done during her pre-natal period...is a case of coercion, attracting legal recourse. There is an implied duty of mutual trust and confidence between employer and employee, which was breached by the employer, whereas employee maintained her end of the respect and returned to work on appointed date of 10 May.Kalpana: Onil, I must clarify. I have no desire to sue Geffel Stace Bank - that period is dead and gone and they can go to hell for all I care. Hence these issues you point out appear to me as a case against Geffel, which I really have no desire to stoke. My aspiration is to haul up Ms Prakash for deluding, misleading, gossiping and bringing disrepute to me in the esteem of a new employer owing to which I lost my candidature at Cyben Pharma. I did not lose on grounds of merit, but owing to an unwarranted, untrue and unprofessional feedback that was delivered casually, entirely with an intent to malign me and cause me loss of job opportunity. And even within all this, the issue I protest against is, her choice of words that paints all women poorly – ‘emotional and imbalanced like women are.’Onil: Yes, yes, I was coming to this and now I see your point. It is not the opinion of Prakash that we concern ourselves with, but her covert intention to lure Johri into confusion, probably knowing his susceptibility, so that he turns against you especially after agreeing to receive your candidature. These points I make are to show that not only was there mal-intent in bringing about your dismissal, that mal-intent now appears centred on an obsession of sorts that causes her to hold the reason fresh after three years and prevent another from hiring you.You may not want to link Geffel to this, but the trigger was your ex-boss, who ran your reputation down despite your excellent performance, and that same attitude she has now carried forth to influence Cyben Pharma.Kalpana: You are right, Onil, but does this make sense – listen to me: Sundari Prakash has worsened the situation by telling Johri that I am “emotional and imbalanced like women.” These were the words that Johri is leaning on. In so speaking, Prakash has belittled women and shown them as being incapable of being employed in responsible positions – for, that has been Johri’s take away – And this is what is wrong.Equally I wish to bring legal action on Johri for being irresponsible an employer. If he wanted referral, he should write to Geffel’s HR. But if he chose the golf course, then that referral cannot be used. He has applied Prakash’s judgement to my appointment. And together they have discriminated against me as a woman.onil Das heard her out keenly, then said, “Indian law contains provisions that prohibit any discrimination on caste, creed, sex, race. Article 14 guarantees equality before law... Article 15 prohibits discrimination ‘only’ on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them. However, these rights are guaranteed only within state and government-run institutions. “Presently, there is no comprehensive anti-discrimination code in India although there are laws that address specific aspects related to equality such as the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, etc., which attempt to address the existent systemic discrimination towards women in employment. Kalpana was horrified. “ You can’t be serious? This is so backward! Since 1961, the needs of women have grown. That being so, what use is an Act of 1961? How old is this Article 15 that circumscribes its application to only the public sector?I can see that this must have been enacted post-Independence when there was only the public sector for employment. Private enterprise may not have even been an idea those days. Today the private sector is huge, should not these laws be examined and applied to the private sector too? More so, women today are mainstream and they have a great need to be looked after (by the law to begin with) until the rest of society comes to accept them and their needs.I am feeling discriminated by gender by both my ex boss and now Johri at Cyben – and this has stood in my way and cost me a fair interview and job at Cyben.So, if as you say Article 15 is not tenable, then what is the recourse available to me under law? casestudymeera@gmail.com (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 29-06-2015)
Read More
The issues in the case study: 1. Wrongful dismissal of Kalpana Dixit by her employer, the conduct of its officers and failure to take remedial action upon complaint. More specifically, wrongful actions based on biases and prejudices held about women, especially in the case of those returning to work after maternity.
Read More
As Kalpana Dixit is realising, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons, employment relationships are the closest thing we have to family relationships. And just like a divorce, the breakup of a working relationship can cause feelings of resentment, betrayal, anger and an insatiable desire for revenge. Sundari Prakash may be acting on these feelings by 'sticking it' to Kalpana by giving a very bad reference to Akrur Johri, even though Kalpana doesn't deserve it.The question here is: Is there is a legal recourse to the 'harm' caused to Kalpana? Does Kalpana really need a pure legal recourse? My response is in the negative. Also, I believe Indian society is still struggling to evolve from a survival society to a leisure society, thus, it is premature for legislature to divert its law making machinery from more critical survival issues. So, does that mean that Prakash should get away with 'blue murder'? Absolutely, not. However, we need to consider whether Prakash would have reasonable defences, including the following:1) Prakash has a right to speech1. But her freedom of speech does not extend to defaming2 others. According to the Indian Constitution, the fundamental right to free speech (Article 19) is subject to 'reasonable restrictions'. And defamation takes place 'by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, to make or publish any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation, of such person.' 2) Did Prakash say something that was factually untrue3? People2 are allowed to make true and factual statements to others, even if they hurt a person. Only if Prakash or Geffel Stace state something definitively factually untrue, then Kalpana could have a cause of action.3) Did Prakash state an opinion? She may also state opinions to others, even if harmful4. 4) The thing that Prakash may not do is make negative false factual statements to third parties, like Johri. Such statements may result in defamation. 5) Just the fact that Kalpana's separation from Geffel Stace was not an amicable one, does not give her a recourse against them. Arguably, even if she felt the separation was amicable, since whether something is 'amicable' or not, is largely a matter of perception or opinion, Kalpana would probably not have any recourse. So, if Prakash said nothing factually incorrect; maybe stated an opinion that she had a right over. Maybe her flippant act could border on being careless, almost negligent. So does Kalpana have any defence / recourse? Let's consider certain aspects of Kalpana's 'case' now, including some obvious ones:1. Her termination, its rationale, principle of LIFO5, discrimination or equal treatment is not of concern to Kalpana. Thus, we will not analyse all the laws that protect these employment situations. 2. If Kalpana did nothing wrong, the truth can be her best ally. 3. As discussed above, Prakash's negative input is not wrongful or unlawful per se.Prakash's negative input may be illegal, if the same is categorised as: a) Discrimination; b) Defamation, Libel or Slander6; c) Tortious interference; d) Damage to Kalpana's reputation; e) Retaliation with malicious intent; f) Disparagement; or g) Sexual harassment7. 4. In order to sue, Kalpana would have to prove exactly what was said, and to who, and show how those statements caused her lack of work. If she is able to establish these basics, Kalpana may have a claim against Prakash as well as Geffel Stace; in relative terms, the claim against Prakash may be easier to prove.5. As an example, to establish defamation, Kalpana would have to prove the following four elements in a Court: a) False statement: This may require some effort to prove. Interestingly, it is this element that employers try to avoid by only giving out name, dates of service and designation in any reference letter8! b) Identify claimant: the claimant should be identified in the defamatory statement. The content must be clearly addressing a particular person for her to be defamed. A general statement like: "All women are emotional and imbalanced", is too broad a classification and hence no particular woman may consider it to be personally attributed to her. Therefore, such statements are not defamation. Kalpana would need to be clearly identified by Prakash in relation to this comment. c) Publication/Communication: There must be a publication of the defamatory statement in either oral or written form. Unless the content is published - made available to someone other than the claimant, there can be no defamation. 'Publication' in legal terms simply means 'communication to a third party.' Prakash satisfies this element by simply speaking about her to Johri. Under a criminal suit9, intention to defame is an important element10. In the absence of intention, the knowledge that the communication was likely to defame or is defamatory becomes essential. All this is further subject to the normal standard of proof in criminal cases: That is, beyond reasonable doubt! d) Harms reputation: The presence of defamatory content is necessary. Defamatory content is defined as one calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him/her to hatred, contempt or ridicule11. This element may be easy for Kalpana to prove; she just needs to show that she did not get the job she applied for at Cyben. 6. Finally, Prakash has a right to respond to requests for references, but no right to contact prospective or current employers to intentionally interfere. Prakash may well be surprised by Kalpana's anger on something she told a friend over a casual meeting! To everyone's knowledge, there was no formal request for a referral and no formal response thereto. If Kalpana determines that Prakash's negative inputs are not unlawful but are simply restricting her ability to secure future employment, the situation may typically be addressed through the transmittal of a Cease & Desist Notice. Onil Das can issue the same to Prakash, telling Prakash to 'cease and desist' from her bad conduct, or else suffer the initiation of a lawsuit. The letter would alert Prakash of the consequences of the negative reference. Since most employers prohibit providing any negative reference to ex-employees, Prakash would be concerned that this notice does not reach the management of Geffel Stace Bank. Be it realiisation of the consequence of her casual statements, and the possible consequences of her management becoming aware of the notice may prompt Prakash to not offer - out of self-interest - any negative commentary again.There is one potential trap here that Kalpana should avoid. Ideally, the Case & Desist Notice must not sound offensive to other prospective employers, who may view it as an attempt to hide the truth. It should be strong and specific, yet respectful. It is best not to mention the false things Prakash may have allegedly said, and avoid naming witnesses. It is possible that this notice might one day be shown by Prakash to prospective employers as evidence that Kalpana is someone who 'Likes to threaten, manipulates the truth, and hides behind lawyers'. It is with this knowledge that the Notice may be drafted. After sending the Cease & DesistNotice, Kalpana may wait for a week or two. An irreverant way to test the impact would be to ask a friend to call Prakash, or write to her, and ask for a job reference for Kalpana. She may do this with a certain periodicity subsequently too. If anything negative is said, she could report it to Mr Das,who could then send a second, more menacing notice. If it doesn't stop, litigation is an option12. Once Prakash finds herself in court, starts spending legal fees, she may develop a new sense of self-control. Does Kalpana have any other options? Yes. She can be proactive and prepare a positive reference documentation set. Ideally containing laudatory work and character references from former employers, customers, industry leaders, and professors. Where would Geffel Stace Bank (and Prakash) fit into this? Geffel Stace Bank would need to appear on her resume. If she still believes she may be bad-mouthed, she should consider preparing a clarificatory letter, herself. To Whomsoever It May Concern One of my former managers, Sundari Prakash of Geffel Stace Bank, was upset with me that I chose to have a child after spending 8 years with Geffel Stace Bank. For that reason, Ms. Prakash may remain upset with me to this day. Sometimes former colleagues hold on to negative feelings, and there is little that can be done about it. All I can assure you is that I provided the same unstinting performance for Geffel Stace Bank that I did for all of my other former employers. I have enclosed herewith contact information of three clients I served during my tenure with Geffel Stace Bank. You will appreciated that clients are the ultimate arbiters of performance, and I invite you to contact them; each has offered to serve as a reference. I can understand if you wish to speak with Sundari Prakash directly; and for that purpose I herewith provide her contact information.Kalpana is in a difficult spot, but not an impossible one. Kalpana must deal with Prakash as she would deal with all other obstacles, road bumps and frustrations in her life: with perspective, professionalism and planning. The odds are that, sooner or later, Prakash will find another target for her insecurities and Kalpana her equilibrium. Again, we actually have no clue how Prakash would react to a formal request for a reference for Kalpana. We have entirely based our analysis on an informal conversation between two friends in a casual environment. Footnote references1) A fine balance is required between protecting freedom of speech, fair comment and criticism on the one hand and transgression into malicious defamation of a person for oblique purposes on the other.2) For the purpose of criminal defamation, 'reasonable restrictions' are defined in Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. This section defines Defamation and provides valid exceptions when a statement is not considered to be Defamation.3) As a general rule, it is not Defamation to impute anything, which is true, concerning any person. In India, truth is an absolute defense in Civil Cases, however; in Criminal cases, the true statement must also be an imputation for public good. Therefore, irrespective of the intention of an individual, no Defamation suit may be brought against someone if he imputes something true (and for public good).4) In case of defamatory opinions, the exception of fair comment is generally accepted. The communication has to be clearly expressed as an opinion. As a defence against Defamation, such opinion should be one that a lay person is capable of holding, even if the reasoning is illogical. 5) 'Last In First Out', as a concept of 'letting go' of the last employee hired, in a defined category of employees, in the first instance, when the category is undergoing a reduction in workforce. 6) Libel and slander, both forms of defamation, follow English common law principles. Indian jurisprudence does not treat them as distinct from each other. The defamed has a remedy both in civil law for damages and in criminal law for punishment. India in many ways provides additional protection to the defamed, unlike any other country of the world. Defamation as a crime is almost non-existent elsewhere. Tort law, which sums up the civil law for defamation, is not codified as legislation and depends on judge-made law. The Indian Penal Code (Section 499) provides the criminal law for defamation. 7) Probably will not work, as Indian law only recognises one form of sexual harassment, which is where a male sexually harasses a female. 8) Many employers will release only basic information when contacted for a reference. They usually confirm employment dates and job responsibilities, salary history, and might include information about whether the employee was dismissed or chose to leave on his/her own. Even for employees who may not be model employees, most employers do not give specific details about conduct. Most employers act responsibly and (even if a former employee was not ideal) they provide respectful (or at least neutral) references. 9) Under a civil suit, once all these conditions are satisfied, a Defamation suit subsists, and the defendant has to plead a privilege or take up a defense. If the defendant fails to do so satisfactorily, the Defamation suit is successful.10) Indian Supreme Court in the 'Auto Shanker' case (R. Rajagopal versus State of Tamil Nadu, 1994) noted expositions by the U.S. Supreme Court and set out broad principles on which libel and privacy law may evolve for India. The test of proving malice by the defamed has now been incorporated into Indian jurisprudence. In reality, Defamation cases in India usually lose relevance, as most are either settled or get delayed beyond the call of reason. In this matter, the Indian Supreme Court referred tothe celebrated 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan, of the U.S. Supreme Court. 11) An imputation is said to harm a person's reputation:a) if it directly or indirectly, lowers, in the estimation of others, i) the moral or intellectual character of that person, or ii) the character of that person in respect of his caste or calling, or iii) the credit of the person, or b) if it causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.12) The punishment for Defamation is a simple imprisonment for up to 2years or with fine or with both. The writer is a partner with J. Sagar Associates(A version of this was published in Businessworld issue dated 29 June 2015)
Read More
Someone once spoofed: “A company is known by the man it keeps!” It is not the first time that an MNC has misjudged the Indian psyche of doing business on the ground, and certainly not the first time that leaders have misread what it takes to move from an established organisation to a startup. There are three critical success factors for startup organisations:1. Integrating leadership and business acumen: It is common for top person selections to be made on the basis of pedigree and technical competence. However, it is vital to also assess how easy or difficult it will be for the person to make the transition to a new environment, how well the person understands the new organisation’s ethos and business goals AND what are the person’s real leadership skills to deal with ambiguity. There appear to be many reasons for the initial failure. Andre didn’t understand that Kloop wanted breakeven in Year One and that there wasn’t much tolerance for a gestation period. It was clear that he did not know how a national distributor set-up would work and what it would take for him to collaborate and work seamlessly to achieve success. 2. Integrating values and beliefs in the ways of working: There is a psychological framework called the ladder of inference, which impacts an individual’s ability to achieve goals and assimilate new learning. The ladder of inference outlines how emotional triggers affect how we interpret the situation, what assumptions we make and the beliefs we hold — all of which combine to move us to action. Clearly, a balanced and objective viewpoint would lead to a positive ladder of inference and actions that lead to desired outcomes. I wonder if Andre was stuck in a downward spiral personally in terms of his skills and capabilities to make the transition to a new organisation and establish credibility. This could, in turn, have led to a negative ladder of inference about the how the failure for the organisation was because of the selection of an unsophisticated national distributor. 3. Proactively enabling integration: New entrants to the Indian market often underestimate the impact and role of culture, tradition and relationships in business success. It is not apparent to me that the top leadership team of Kloop were active in setting up expectations and creating an environment of collaboration between all the parties concerned. Notwithstanding the fact that Belani was appointed before Andre came on board, it seemed strange to me that the “mediator” in the case was a third-party consultant and not the senior leadership at Kloop. As the saying goes, there are two types of leaders — those that say “come on people” and those that say “go on people”. I saw a lot of the “go on people” at various levels across Kloop, which is perhaps why they got into the situation they did.It is quite unusual to see third-party consultants so closely committed to the success of the business. To this end, we need to appreciate the tenacity and perseverance that Raghuveer demonstrates. He comes through as really working towards the collaboration that is so necessary. His courage to deal with the situation in an objective manner really moves things ahead. Of course, the significant thing is what he says towards the end: “I wish I was not the one doing this to you guys!” I absolutely agree — this should have rightly come from Bawa or Haney. Ideally, they should have been there with Belani and Andre.I believe, we all understand that mutuality and collaboration are the pillars for achieving desired outcomes. Aligning on a common goal and purpose creates opportunities for exploring what will work and what adjustments need to be made along the way. Above all, collaboration will build on stakeholder strengths and thus contribute to a virtuous cycle of behaviours. Leadership at all levels must see it as their responsibility to nurture and set the framework for right behaviours. Organisation culture needs to enhance mutual respect and an environment to speak up and iron out the rough spots. We must collectively work towards making a positive, iterative cycle of Connecting-Exploring-Committing to ensure that strong relationships form the bedrock of collective success. (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 29-06-2015)
Read More
Andre Ramdas was delighted with his new appointment. US- based foods company Kloop had just confirmed his appointment as their India head of business. Andre who had 18 years in senior sales management in three different MNCs in the foods business, including three years in the UK was seen as a good fit for Kloop, which was finalising its entry into India. Andre had been looking for change only because Teffer, where he was heading the growing foods business, was considering hiving off its ready-to-eat business owing to a recessionary trend in the company. Andre did not want to be caught on the wrong foot, besides which he was tired of not being able to grow the business at Teffer as month after month budgets were slashed. Last month, Kloop showed interest in buying Teffer’s foods business as a part of its entry into India. Andre had been making all the presentations for the strategy meetings and one thing led to another. Kloop dropped the Teffer plan, but picked up Andre to strategise its entry into India and run their breakfast cereals business for them. Andre was delighted. Kloop’s director sales then discussed their plan for India — that initially they would not buy office but rent, would not invest in an owned distribution system but appoint a distributor.... Now as he came down the lift in New Delhi’s Leela Hotel, he felt complete and great— he would be running a business and taking charge, This was what he had been aching for, to give expression to his business skills. Kloop had drawn up its entry strategy along with Madhur Bawa, Kloop’s Asia Pacific director, and Raghuveer Singh of Bright & Thakur, a consulting firm they had engaged to partner their processes in the first few years. Kloop Chairman Ben Haney had been firm about not investing in own distribution. The next best option was to hire a distributor. Which is what they did. Shyamchand Belani was a hardy distributor for a number of FMCG products , belonging to a family that had been in distribution since the 1940s. Andre Ramdas had all the classic sales experience that MNCs provide. He was used to developing his own sales and market plans. A distributor-led sales approach intrigued him. This was slightly different from the American and European companies he had worked with. Of course, he had worked with distributors earlier too but they were directed by the company and depended on the company. Distribution, he assessed was the first biggest stumbling block for any manufacturer and for a start-up or new venture, it could pose a bottleneck. Could Kloop afford this? Distributors like Belani were also bureaucratic and dogmatic, with multiple layers of authority responsibility so that the race to the market would be riddled with many, many stops. Andre already felt trapped. In fact, he had seen exactly this play out at Teffer when it launched its milk drink. None of the company’s distributors wanted to handle a small brand or let it piggy back ride their soaps and toothpastes... and nor was Teffer allowing Andre to develop his own network for such a small product centre and yet they had been assessing him for failure to deliver. Now at Kloop India, the entire thing was like a deja vous with the difference that Kloop’s product categories were more vibrant — breakfast cereals and between-meal niblets. What made it worse was that Belani’s fragmented distribution would cause a bumpy ride and would not deliver a robust delivery plan for a product like cereal. “In short,” he said to Madhur Bawa (Asia Pacific chief), “you will not be maximising your market reach. Your advertising will make enthusiastic claims of health and taste, but you will not go beyond cities.” Bawa had no anxiety. He trusted Belani to do his job. Meanwhile, Andre found it tough to work with Belani. There was a lot about Belani that was alien and difficult. Add to that, Belani did not speak English, his essential edifice was Hindi and this challenged Andre’s mental environment. As he reasoned with Annie George, his ex-secretary, “I have nothing against Hindi, but in the work context, it tends to develops a certain casual nature. Or maybe I associate it with Bollywood...” Annie had agreed. Reality for Andre, was facing Shyamchand and often finding him growling at his people and calling them names. That was, of course, small; but Belani had the attitude of the old world when it came to business. “There is a certain modernity of thought that one expects to see in him but he seems to belong to the old world kirana mentality of blaming staff for poor performance,” Andre told the global sales head. “He is not marking up well for a brand like Kloop which has a great need for market suaveness and aggression.” By and by, Andre was not even calling to talk to Belani. In short, Belani was not inspiring. To be fair, Andre himself wished there was something professional in Belani, which could mask the language disaster. If Belani sold better and faster Andre would have coped with his colloquial Hindi to please him. For his part, Belani was happy. His work carried on and he had 14 other agencies to fret over. Soon, Andre was not getting daily reports or weekly updates regularly. He had now begun to call Belani’s assistant, one Jignesh who gave him the inside stories often. But Andre was unable to moot change, for then Jignesh asked him to talk to Belani — the dead end street. At the end of two months of the market launch, the products had not moved much. Every target had failed. Belani had an all India team of territory managers, ASMs, field support and so on. Many of these had worked at slightly lower levels in the MNCs and had gained great finesse in sales and distribution. Belani hired them at the same remuneration with a decent designation thrown in. His menu of MNC FMCG brands was the best experience these boys and girls could get. Belani knew, as did Kloop, that if he lost three brands, he would lose his people. For Kloop this was a big risk but a risk they could hedge on because they had Bawa from Singapore keeping a close watch on Belani’s business. If Bawa thought he was soon handing that charge to Andre, he had another think coming. For the distance between Andre and Belani was growing. And he said to Bawa and Haney, “This guy is a lala-type (leaving it to Bawa to interpet for Haney in the US); he is high risk... !” But when Andre had said this several times, Haney grew anxious and asked him to hire four regional sales managers (RSMs), so that he could oversee the four regions better. Besides, this was the best insurance Kloop could buy against Belani’s nebulous team. The new four RSMs were good back up. End of the fourth month, growth was far from inspiring. Andre was having a bad time with Belani. “He is simply lax on targets,” he said. Belani for his part blamed efforts behind building new markets and the competition. He even said that breakfast habits were changing because people were not really in favour of milk. Bawa in Singapore turned upon Andre, “But we hired you. What are you doing? You are accountable for managing the risk!” Six months passed and the market barely opened up to Kloop’s cereal — a range of 9 different variants. Kloop USA was now getting restive and turned the heat on Bawa in Singapore. He, in turn, called B&T’s Raghuveer Singh who said Kloop needed to look at five years and not just the first year. “Let us do a plan for three, then five years and examine.”Haney in the US, meanwhile, was wringing his hands. His stance did not change: if India did not achieve targets this year, they would close down India, hence a three- or five-year plan was just academic. But Singapore was disheartened. For them, India business was key to their happiness. The numbers came from India!Belani and Andre were often at each other’s throats. If Haney and Bawa demanded performance, Andre threw it back at them saying they have hired a lame duck (in Belani), and “he was hired before I came on board!” Funnily Bawa in Singapore did not even know that the distributor and business head were not meeting each other! It happened thus that when Bawa called Belani, he complained, “Your CEO does not even know the way to my office!” And then, all hell broke loose. Andre claimed Belani was never there when he called, and thus they served their anger back and forth. Raghuveer Singh watched all this with great disconcertment. “Do I like Andre or not, is not even an issue,” he told an anxious Bawa. “Finally they are all bodies who get paid to work. Belani gets commission, Andre gets a fat remuneration and both have very clear job descriptions and delivery parameters. They had both jolly well work!” He realised the problem of slow growth lay in the widening chasm between Andre and Belani. “Capability is not at all in question. Neither Andre’s nor Belani’s. Both are seasoned players but both have missed the road to each other. Belani is a hardened market man. He does not need English or an MBA to play the market successfully. He is seeking support and endorsement of his moves. Same for Andre. He is excellent a sales manager. Somewhere he does not understand that his plan and Belani’s plans are near identical. Andre needs encouragement. Don’t shove him into the dog house.” One day, Raghuveer walked into Andre’s office and said, “Andre, let us address current issues. There is no one magic solution. It has to come from discussing. The way forward is fixing responsibility, accountability and if Belani has to take a rap on his knuckles, then rap his knuckles we shall.” Bawa was happy rapping anyone’s knuckles. Meanwhile Raghuveer sat and drummed up 30 ideas that Kloop India could work on to accelerate growth, excite the market, play with consumer joy. He sent this document to Andre. But Andre who had likely turned hopeless, wrote back to Bawa and Haney to say none of these were tenable or workable. A furious Bawa shot back a reply, “This is your responsibility, show some action! Take ownership and set the agenda for the meeting. If these 30 are bloomers, then come up with your ten?!” Raghuveer did not like the tone that was taking over. He understood everyone’s compunctions but he also desired equanimity. Without that business could not happen. “We can bicker all we want,” he told Bawa. “But finally work can come only from a centre of peace.” But his shock new no bounds when a frustrated Andre did a Reply All: “This is a meeting designed to prove me wrong and ineffective. I did not hire Belani, and he is a huge part of the problem. You solve him and I will solve your market. Maybe Raghuveer holds the key?” Bawa thought he was being tongue-in-cheek; Raghuveer felt maybe Andre was actually asking for help. Haney shook his head and chanted his mantra: he was shutting down India. This did not augur well for anyone: not for Singapore, not for India. Andre did a sequel to his last mail to everyone and said in particular to Bawa, “My responsibility depends a lot on Belani fulfilling his. Those who are responsible for appointing him need to crack the whip on him to deliver his end of the bargain.”Raghuveer sat making furious notes, late one evening when his partner asked him, “Any joy with Kloop? What’s the story?” Raghuveer: If I narrate a story, there will be a villain and a hero and a victim. They all look bad, sad and mad. We need to wait for the story to play out. In any new organisation, even the best guys will throttle each other if we do not have a mentor/coach. It is a moment of great churn. No villains in my story....but everyone put their heads together to see what could be done to improve the sales performance as everyone was concerned about Haney’s ultimatum. Shutting down India would mean many things, chiefly everyone at Kloop India would lose their jobs; Belani’s ROI would be smashed and he would have to sack 20 people to stay afloat. That was not a very nice situation to look forward to. Would cooperation work? Would bitter anger work? Where lay the solution when egos were like daggers drawn? Raghuveer met Belani. He was doing the bare minimum; in short he just sold, but did not push the product. “You people have to ideate all that, what can I do?” was his response. But he could have acted on a tip that Arpita, one of Raghuveer’s consultants had worked on. Two large hotel chains, clients of Bright and Thakur agreed to use Kloop Breakfast cereal for six months. But Belani was unable to act on it nor was Andre able to close the deal. He had found several ‘difficulties’ with the arrangement and had left the transaction hanging in mid air. Andre was busy chasing the market and retail, no doubt, but in the hotel chain sale prospect, there was opportunity for strengthening the brand presence. So felt Bawa and Arpita, but the Dubai office felt Andre was tacitly sabotaging any success so that he could prove that Belani was a stunningly bad idea. Andre had also launched his ad campaign much before the products arrived from the US. Belani had fought that saying the consumer will demand the product once the ad appears hence it would be better to wait. But Andre had his marketing reasons, which also sounded reasonable. So, the classic marketing-sales tussle had begun. Raghuveer felt they needed to work together and not as separate beings, for Kloop needed both their skills and cooperation. Come December, and sales were abysmal. Bawa in Singapore refused to talk to Andre and Andre refused to talk to Belani and Belani refused to waste his time talking at all. He said, “I am a seasoned distributor, I will work alone, what sells, sells; what does not is because your CEO was not cooperating.”Haney was now on the warpath. Nothing was improving. He prepared to pull the Indian shutters down. Belani refused to be bullied into performance by Andre, “It is your brand you should be concerned. You cannot sit in your office and dictate to me how to run my business!” he said. Andre, beginning to feel the heat as March approached, met Belani’s sales team and pushed them. They identified with Andre as they too were from MNCs, so some small bonhomie prevailed but somewhere they resented the fact that their boss was not in with them on this. When Reghuveer met Andre for an overview, he cribbed , “Belani does not have time for me!” Even so, Raghuveer was keen to make it work, probably also because Kloop was his client and he had a sense of commitment. “Why don’t you go over the various ideas I had sent you?” he said to Andre. “It will create positive motivation among your team of RSMs and that of Belani’s.” But Andre was by now frustrated, fed up and also beginning to lose hope. He had enough to do, he barely slept, and now he did not want untested ideas. Andre was losing his composure slowly as his four RSMs began to fret too. “Maybe we are expecting results too soon?” he suggested. “ It is not even a year! All MNC brands have taken more than eight years to break-eve”. Eight years? Haney’s global team even wanted Andre to make up for the six months he had lost. Andre realised that blaming Belani would land him in deeper mess. That was also when Raghuveer had the onerous task of meeting Belani and Andre together for a very bad lunch session where he spoke in no uncertain terms how the two had failed, even as both of them yelled over his head at each other. Raghuveer read out from a message from Haney and Bawa: “If targets are not delivered by mid May, India operations will be closed on 1 June.” In a last ditch bid, the next day, Raghuveer called both men to a new location right next to Belani’s office. It was a small business centre. He showed them both into a room that was fitted with phones printers, fax machines and whatnot. “This is your new office,” he said to both of them as they looked at him, stunned. “Now, work together... sitting here. You need anything from your offices? Ask your fellows to fetch it to you!” If Andre tried to protest, Raghuveer shrugged his shoulders very helplessly. “I wish I was not the one making you guys do this, this is a farmaan from Haney in the US,” he lied helplessly. But Belani laughed and said, “Theek hai, bhai, if this is the Boss’ order, we will sit here and work!’ By evening that day, Andre’s Hindi was suitably diluted to be engaging enough so that Belani enjoyed. Raghuveer was disbelieving. How did the situation change so dramatically? Andre was discussing SWOTs, understanding Belani’s difficulties, offering solutions and before long even thumping him on the back with a cheer....it began to work. At the end of it, there were nine executives from large MNCs who stood to lose their jobs and the pressure got them to work to make it work! That month they achieved the monthly target and in three months the third quarter targets were exceeded! Clearly the initial push itself had been missing, and once they came under pressure, they crossed even the targets. Bawa was dumbfounded. No one was able to say anything. The only one who spoke was Andre, to Raghuveer, “Let us discuss your ideas soon and see what we can implement?” (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-06-2015)
Read More
Someone once spoofed: “A company is known by the man it keeps!” It is not the first time that an MNC has misjudged the Indian psyche for doing business on the ground, and certainly not the first time that leaders misread what it will take to move from an established organisation to a start up. There are three critical success factors for start-up organisations: 1. Integrating leadership and business acumenIt is common for top person selections to be made on the basis of pedigree and technical competence. However, it is vital to also assess how easy or difficult it will be for the person to make the transition to a new environment, how well they understand the new organisation’s ethos and business goals AND what are their real leadership skills to deal with ambiguity. There appear to be many reasons for the initial failure. Andre didn’t understand that Kloop wanted breakeven in Year One and that there wasn’t a huge tolerance for a gestation period. It was clear that he did not know how a national distributor set up would work and what it would take for him to collaborate and work seamlessly to achieve success. 2. Integrating values and beliefs in the ways of workingThere is a psychological framework called the ladder of inference, which impacts an individual’s ability to achieve goals and assimilate new learning. The ladder of inference outlines how emotional triggers affect how we interpret the situation, what assumptions we make and the beliefs we hold – all of which combine to move to us action. Clearly, a balanced and objective viewpoint, would lead to a positive ladder of inference and actions that lead to desired outcomes. I wonder if Andre was stuck in a downward spiral personally in terms of his skills and capabilities to make the transition to a new organisation and establish credibility. This could in turn have led to a negative ladder of inference about the how the failure for the organisation was because of the selection of an unsophisticated national distributor. 3. Proactively enabling integrationNew entrants to the Indian market often underestimate the impact and role of culture, tradition and relationships in business success. It is not apparent to me that the top leadership team of Kloop were active in setting up expectations and creating an environment of collaboration between all the parties concerned. Notwithstanding the fact that Belani was appointed before Andre came on board, it seemed strange to me that the “mediator” in the case was a third party consultant and not the senior leadership at Kloop. As the saying goes ..there are two types of leaders – those that say “come on people” and those who say “go on people”. I saw a lot of the “go on people” at various levels across Kloop, which is perhaps why they got into the situation they did. It is quite unusual to see third party consultants so closely committed to the success of the business. To this end, we need to appreciate the tenacity and perseverance that Raghuveer demonstrates. He comes through as really working towards the collaboration that is so necessary. His courage to deal with the situation in an objective manner really moves things ahead. Of course, the significant thing is what he says towards the end “I wish I was not the one doing this to you guys!” I absolutely agree – this should have rightly come from Bawa or Haney. Ideally they should have been there with Belani and Andre. I believe, we all understand that mutuality and collaboration are the pillars for achieving desired outcomes. Aligning on a common goal and purpose create the opportunities for exploring what will work and what adjustments need to be made along the way. Above all, collaboration will build on stakeholder strengths and thus contribute to a virtuous cycle of behaviours. Leadership at all levels must see it as their responsibility to nurture and set the framework for right behaviours. Organisation culture needs to enhance mutual respect and an environment to speak up and iron out the rough spots. We must collectively work towards making a positive, iterative cycle of Connecting - Exploring - Committing to ensure that strong relationships form the bedrock of collective success. The writer, Matangi Gowrishankar, is the Head of Capability Development for the Downstream Businesses of BP plc. She is passionate about organisation and leadership development (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-06-2015)
Read More
Successful people motivate, inspire and push their team to succeed. They thrive on building positive relationships. Unsuccessful people just fret, blame and complain. This is a case of three human dysfunctionalities prevalent in different measure across the globe in all spheres of life:1. ‘I’ versus ‘You’, and never ‘we together’2. ‘I want control, but don’t question me on results’3. I want change, but I don’t want to change The above three lead people to waste their energies in analysing why things cannot be done rather than how to get the best possible result from the given circumstances with the given resources. ProblemAndre appears to have carried forward his insecurities of his previous job into his new role. These insecurities were making him see the devil in everything – Kloop’s planning, their decision to outsource distribution, Belani’s lala style of work culture and even his English. Andre found it difficult to adjust to the fact that in the new setup, the distributor was not under him as was the case in his previous organisation. His apparent sulking exposed his vulnerability to his bosses and refrained him from communicating with his ‘partner’ Belani. Belani is a successful entrepreneur, in his own right. Having enough experience of dealing with different companies, he would have sensed the hostility of Andre towards him. His team would have given him the feeler that Andre is critical about Belani’s way of working and is bypassing him by dealing directly with his team. To this, Belani reacted by ignoring Andre. But by doing so, he ignored Kloop and therefore his own business. Genesis:1. Was Andre the best choice for heading the India operations? To be fair to Andre, his core strength was sales and distribution. He had been groomed in his career in MNCs to create the best distribution network. It was natural for him to find gaps in Belani’s system. If Kloop was clear that Belani will be handling sales and distribution, they should have recruited somebody with more diverse strengths to complement that of Belani’s. 2. Had Kloop and Bawa created the right expectations for both Belani and Andre? It is very important to properly induct a new country manager especially for a start-up business. Expectations, responsibilities, defined boundaries and availability and capability of resources, should be revisited at regular intervals. 3. India is a vast, diverse and complex market. First year’s performance should never lead to a ‘Continue or Exit’ decision which Haney was pushing for. Such pressure can lead to detrimental decision in the long run. 4. Normally the team which initially gets involved in the formulation of strategic tie ups (JV, acquisition, merger or even appointment of an all India distributor) moves out once the tie up is done. And a new operational team takes over. In such cases, people like Belani feel unsettled because the bonhomie he had created with the first team doesn’t automatically get extended to the new team, and he has to restart afresh in building new relationships. With Bawa sitting abroad, it didn’t help Belani’s cause. It is therefore desirable to have one senior resource (mentor?) from the original team to be around for the first few months to a year. This resource would have tackled the conflict which arose between Belani who was heading an established organisation and Andre who was setting up a new organisation for the first time. He could have played the right balancing role. StimuliRaghuveer realised that more than six months had passed but there was no progress made. He realised that the solution providers were themselves the issue. And unless Belani and Andre communicate directly and work together, the problem will never be resolved. He had to wag the dogs by their tails. And that’s what he did, he used their insecurities (shutting the business) as a tool to initiate direct communication. Luckily it worked and hopefully Kloop will do well in India. Whatever happens, happens for the good. It is for us to keep the good alive. The writer, Rohit Das, is Director, Intrim Business Associates. He has 27 years of work experience of which he has been working as a corporate consultant for the last 7 years. He is also a start up and turnaround specialist and actively participates as a life coach and mentor. (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-06-2015)
Read More
Gauri Rao stood in the middle of the bridge rooom at the Crucible Club, fanning herself. It was incredibly hot and the two main French windows were sealed shut. Presently, a staffer Ram Singh came rushing in. Gauri: Kaise ho, Ram Singh? (and then...) There is a meeting at 4:00 p.m. Why is the air-conditioning not on? Ram Singh: Ma’am, I was told that since only women are attending, there was no need to turn it on.Gauri (smiling at Ram Singh): Can you please turn on the AC? And that must have been Mr Dua’s instructions?Ram Singh: Yes ma’am.Gauri called Mr Vijet Dua. “Hello Mr Dua, you have been well? ... Of course, me too! Ah, I was saying, can Ram Singh turn on the AC even if the meeting is women only? Oh? I didn’t think I had to reveal the agenda of my meeting, Mr Dua? Ha ha ha. What can be so confidential? Well, we are plotting... ha ha ha! And here is Ram Singh, poor fellow....When the call ended Ram Singh apologised to Gauri. Gauri: I understand, lekin ab achche din aa rahe hain... ha ha ha! Firdos Daftary walked in saying, “I didn’t need directions, Gauri, I just followed your famous laughter!” As the rest of the ladies arrived, the AC began to cool better. They were meeting at Gauri Rao’s behest. Last week, there had been quite a buzz as the deadline approached for Sebi’s directive to companies to compulsorily appoint women on their boards and many companies were frantically calling placement firms to find them lady directors. At the Morro Group, CMD Vinayak Morro had not been able to find a capable lady director for the board of Morro Vulcan Steel. Three names that were sent to him by a placement firm had not met favour with his retired father, Vittal Morro. “They are good managers,” he told Vinayak and Shirish Patnaik, the CFO of Morro Vulcan Steels. “But a director is a director...she have to bring that extra special fire to the boardroom. Ten years from now, all three will be very good. But not today....Find women with prior board experience!” said Vittal Morro.Vinayak Morro: Baba, there aren’t too many! Vittal Morro: Maybe, but I am not appointing untrained directors, male or female. It is unfair to everyone. And a hopeless Vinayak Morro had to send three more CVs to Patnaik.Desperation had set in at Morro. Two of the ladies had declined graciously saying they knew nothing about the steel industry, nor had any core experience in heavy industry and did not see themselves adding any value. The third had already taken up two directorships of which one was a start-up, and felt she could never do justice to a third appointment. It was during that terribly frustrating moment, as Patnaik held his head, that Gauri Rao, the head of Morro’s MR, walked in (See BW issue dated 18 May 2015). Having examined the arguments of other senior managers at Morro, Gauri decided to meet some of her women friends who were very senior managers/VPs/functional directors.There was Achala Panigrahi who ran her own successful HR consultancy. There was Krittika Sahni, senior VP at a bank, Firdoz Daftary, quality and purchase head at her father’s hospital, Amai Virkar, CFO at an MNC. There was Madhavi Lal, Morro Retail’s VP Marketing and a few more. Firdoz (major stakeholder in her family business, Hospitals): Media does have a way of twisting occurrences. I have read almost every news report on this and some very reputed magazines think that companies are unwilling or unwanting to appoint women on their Boards. I completely disagree! Manika Wagle (partner in an MR conglomerate): Reluctant? We have a situation of compulsory appointment. Then how can there be reluctance? We do not have board ready women. Gauri: Reluctance could be because the available candidates do not have the requisite qualities. Manika (laughing): A colleague of mine had this to say: ‘Directorships are essentially old buddy clubs in India. How do women become buddies?’The women were amused and laughed, as Firdoz said, “You know, it takes such a lot to reach that level! Not just variety of functions but intensive involvement! And not just hands-on, but also dealing with crisis, with pressure, with bad news, with emergencies, with terrible postings... Gauri: And so that is why we meet today. Have you been approached for a board position, Minhaz? Minhaz Khanna (HR head of a large cement company): A family-run business approached me, but I didn’t make it — I suspect my long international stint was not encouraging! The search firm shared with me the client’s response: she is not very well connected with the circuit in India and she will not be able to bring us business.” Difficult to tell what they meant. But maybe they felt I lacked the cultural fit, whereas I had believed that a board position is about corporate governance and actually leveraging skills and capabilities. Madhavi: Exactly! But please tell me, in this huge brouhaha over wanting ladies on the board, is any company wanting to look at your skills in the area of corporate governance?Minhaz: Interestingly, there was no specific conversation about corporate governance. The meeting felt more like an interview frankly — and that is something I had not anticipated. A couple of women I know who ARE on boards, advised that the best way to do this is to cold call companies and let them know you are interested. Madhavi: Nooo, very inelegant! Yet I guess this must be because this ‘must have women directors’ is an emergency what with deadlines and penalties.... so, I guess you have to do the unseemly, ungainly thing. But I am wary of that... it is a buddies’ club finally!Manika (reading her messages): Ok, he says, ‘Directorships are friendship clubs or parking slots for retirees with good CVs. Structurally, how does a lady fit in? Also directorships are traded. You join my board and I join yours. Only in few cases genuine professionals are used and that’s where women directors are finding place’. Krittika: But there is an undercurrent of gender inhibition. When men get to a functional head position or CEO, they are automatically taken on to the board even without prior board experience —and mentored. But not women... we don’t see that readiness to receive her and coach/mentor her.Madhavi: Has this been the experience of other women like you, too? Achala (HR consultant): Listen to this: in a sales and marketing driven company they used to have a man heading marketing and on the board, but when the man left and a woman was hired, they decided to change the organisation structure such that the marketing position was delinked from a board responsibility. The lady joined and her role was quietly made just a functional one! In her place, a man would have refused to join or would have quit the organisation if the appointment was later delinked from the board position. Now here is the twist. The client’s explanation was that the company already has a female finance director — they don’t think it necessary to have another woman on the board! So, the interesting thing is that no one thinks of increasing gender diversity on the board; they say we need one, we have one — why more?!Gauri: This is the reality. Finally it is all so apologetic....Minhaz: Absolutely! I was told by the interviewer at one such organisation — ok, they are always men who interview for board positions please (everyone laughed) — he said: “ We will put the person first in one of the internal companies before considering them for the board of the public company...” That was odd.., ha ha!Achala: Man or woman, boards want non-assertive people. The constitution of a board is a legal requirement. But many companies want boards that will not question or opine. That might be why the same names appear on many boards. Gauri: Has your firm recommended names for company boards? Achala: Yes, we have. There are enough women who will not come on board unless they are very clear that the company has ethical practices. You see, women have the luxury of choosing the ethical.Minhaz: A male board member said to me, “This space is fraught with danger; Do women really want to go to jail?” I was rather taken aback. Gauri: But that is the underbelly of being in governance. It is often said, ‘Ethics is a luxury women have’ — so they are as easy to drop offers that look even marginally iffy. Krittika: This actually gets very interesting. Obvious as it might seem, why is it easier for women to say, ‘Thanks but no, thanks’ to offers that entail bending the law? Are women less adventurous? Or is adventure and power a male thing? Achala: I am not qualified to comment on that. But I have a different take. First, there is a very small percentage of women in corporate/academic circles at a level where they would make it to the board. And most of them have already satisfied their need for self-actualisation. Hence a board position will only be a bonus and not a necessity. For that, how much risk are they willing to take? This makes them less receptive to any and every company. Plus, women feel more strongly about corruption. Gauri: So, have you asked your lady prospects what their expectations are from a board position? Are they cognisant of the risks? Did your dialogue with them go further? Achala: Yes... we discussed this, and their reaction was, “Find us a proper one”. Why? I feel it is prestige, status — a ‘I have arrived’ funda.Gauri: See, there is a deeper issue here. Granted there are issues of ethics but those are there at all levels, not just boards although I agree the liability is significant at the level of the board. But there is another issue as well. Boards need people who know the industry well, people who have the passion to build your organisation. Achala: I agree, yet what we see is discouraging. One of our clients has just hired a lady director for their board, an IIT grad and an excellent professional. Despite all this, she has been put on a CSR committee. What use is that?Gauri: In my opinion, that is great use! CSR is by far the most misinterpreted. Social responsibility is as important as the main business. Hence, your IIT friend has a tremendous role to play as a strategic advisor to ensure every rupee is spent sensibly. And purposefully, not as a ‘charity’.Amai (who had been quiet all along): My view is that there are a lot of very talented women who could add a great deal to board deliberations. Many of them are outside the corporate world, belonging to professions such as teaching, NGOs, healthcare and so on, and will therefore bring true diversity to corporate boards. Particularly relevant when companies are looking to get more integrated into the societies and communities that they work with.There will be a transition phase that we will go through, and there is of course the fact that promoter-led companies will have their quota of wives/mothers/sisters/daughters appointed to boards, but I think it’s one of the ways to break the clubby world of independent directorships.Gauri: Correct me if I misunderstand. These women you refer to — teachers, professors, scientists, and so on — are you suggesting their profiles for CSR initiatives? Amai: I think it goes well beyond CSR, into the way companies conduct business. For longevity and sustained growth, companies do realise that it is not just the shareholders that they have to consider but also consumers and the community at large. Take the example of a beauty care company. The decision to eschew parabens may not be justified by cost considerations or required by statutory regulations, but can be driven by a longer-term consumer interest; these are typically the kind of larger debates that a more diverse board can address more effectively. Ditto for GM foods.Gauri: So, Firdoz, at your hospital, will you have more than one woman on your board?Firdoz: We already have four women directors but that is because the medical fraternity is equally loaded in favour of women. My question is about the corporate world which has a smaller appetite for mediocrity than, say, the public sector. I worked with a health equipment major for eight years. It is a part of the covenant my Dad enforces for both working with him and earning shares in his hospital business. And in those eight years one thing that stuck with me was this: reservation of any sort promotes mediocrity…as meritocracy gets marginalised. The company I worked with initiated a drive to hire women only in senior positions. A lot of deserving men were denied opportunities to rise in the organisation and some were specifically told that the mandate was for woman managers only. It was a disaster, I promise you.One of you here talked about the onus on directors, personal liability and so on. So what? So really what? This is what reservation does. It makes you want to be protected always. There should be a level playing field...If you mess up, go to jail, take it on the chin...To this day I have to fight it with my three brothers and uncle to win a proposal. It ain’t easy!Gauri slipped her business card towards Firdoz. Vittal Morro would jump with joy to have someone like her, she knew! (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 18-05-2015)
Read More
