I wish, brand managers abhinav and salma had just walked into Spencer’s and picked up conversation with the customer. They would have got answers to many of their questions. One of the big issues in today’s modern world is that as marketers we do not speak to consumers or listen to them. In fact, many of us do the same in our office with our colleagues. We communicate to them through white mail, e-mail or Facebook and Twitter, although we may be a few yards away from our colleague in the office or an aisle away from the consumer in the store. Alternatively, they will engage research agencies to do focus groups with a few customers. Please talk, talk, talk to your customers, most of them love to get attention!This reminds me of a store visit I was doing with the Coke CEO at Hypercity Mumbai a few years ago. As we were walking in the store, he saw a customer carrying a crate of Pepsi in the trolley walking towards the cash counter. He excused himself and started speaking to the customer enquiring why she bought Pepsi instead of Coke. In the next few minutes, I saw the CEO not only getting feedback but he convinced the customer into buying Coke, which he personally picked up from the shelf and put it in her trolley and respectfully kept the Pepsi case back in the right place. What a demonstration of customer interaction, power of convincing and a demonstration to me and his other colleagues that the customer is more important than a store walk or meeting the hypermarket chief executive. In my understanding, every customer has a decision tree in her mind and all her decisions are accordingly made. For example, when she has to buy a pair of jeans, it will be, Fit, Colour, Style and then the Brand. Once the fit is established in her mind, the next purchase is Brand, Colour, Style and Fit, in that order, respectively.My wild guess at the buying process is that the lady was probably looking at an attribute like “Sugar Free” or “No added sugar” or made from fruit pulp with no added synthetic flavour, etc. In this instance, the feature becomes more important than the brand. I have seen promotion and price offs playing a big role in the juice section clearly indicating that brands can be switched at the point of sale until and unless stickiness has been created with one of the features. Therefore, for Kanto and its managers it is critical to understand the decision-making process and the study of how the customer picks up the pack and what and where she looks in for the information. Consistency in placing of the key proposition on the packaging is very critical. Many a times we see brands not paying attention to the printing of MRP as well as expiry date, leading to both being neither visible nor readable, thus forcing the customer to leave the product on the shelf. It may be a sound idea to tell the customer about the key features and also where to look for them on the packaging when creating a communication campaign or promotion material. I love the new Coke advertisement with Deepika Padukone and her neck, clearly talking about price and where to look for it.In this instance, there could be strong possibility that they are already a loyal customer of another brand and the lady wanted to try Kanto juice for some features, which probably she did not find. The daughter only reminded her or prodded her not to change the brand, therefore she just picked up the brand she is used to.We see in supermarkets the shopping behaviour highly influenced by children or family member. In such cases, adjacency of stocking plays a very important role as the presentation and the category focus ensures that the target audience is always kept in mind. Another unique behaviour we see in supermarkets is cross-merchandising with aligned needs of the consumer. For example, if this lady was looking at ‘no added sugar’ juice, then placement next to sugar free category can be of great help. Alternatively lead a category management initiative for breakfast category and with the supermarket player put bread, milk, egg, butter, juices and cereals at a point of display and see and understand the purchase behaviour of the customer.Hi! Abhinav and Salma, please get inside the store and start interacting with customers, you may end up learning as well as selling in the process gaining market share. (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 14-07-2014)
Read More
It is not uncommon to find brands trying to create dreamy perception about their products and services. Products must deliver what they promise. Price sensitivity, high competition and unethical practices challenge both margins and growth for everyone, including the mighty global brands. Rising business complexities cause compromise of values so that ‘chalta-hai’ and ‘jugaad’ become the acceptable way of business. All this is evidently plaguing this case too. My observations are noted below in five parts with some suggestions for feasible fixes.Same Page: More likely than not, forced marriages turn sour. Likewise, healthcare business must move from transactional to relationship mode.At the core of the relationship must be the patient-first approach. Among other agendas, we cannot forget that healthcare is about the patient and for the patient. The broken link, in this case too, between Dr Tara Chaitanya and Company A is the lack of alignment on the patient-first approach; that is critical in generating the sense of urgency for remedial action to avoid adverse effects on quality and timeliness of care. Everyone in the healthcare value chain must maintain this larger sense of purpose. The escalation by Shiv to senior leaders of Company A, done after exhausting all options, was too little and too late. This must be done in the first place to achieve alignment and set the tone for interactions ahead — failing which it is advisable not to do business at all. Similar escalation with Company B and C also while inviting quotations would have opened better dialogue for evaluation of other options. Buying capital medical equipment is the start of a partnership that ensures sustained levels of care by combining the expertise of the care giver and the product/technology from the supplier. This alignment also minimises effects of tangential factors of man vs woman, small vs big provider, standalone vs multi-location-chain, or one staff vs another.Hyper Influence: With the ease, convenience and reach of digital networks, availing their benefits is the need of the hour. In this case, before the purchase, a thorough reality check by Tara through independent reviews from peers would have raised more alarms well in time. Then, after the purchase, reviews would empower Tara’s voice to make suppliers like Company A more responsible and more responsive. Negative reviews can cost a supplier dearly as studies show that majority of buyers use reviews as the basis for their purchase decision. We observed that Shiv’s threat to expose Company A’s slack on social media was a trigger for them to act promptly and initiate remedial action. Unfortunately, though, Tara and Shiv did not learn from their own experience — more precautions should have been taken while upgrading.Even the issue of beta version of the software could not go unnoticed had adequate checks been performed. I strongly urge physicians like Tara to shift their digital participation to a more active state to keep network leverages live round the year. It is a give and take, if you want to enjoy the leverage you need to contribute to the pool as well. It may be wiser to cultivate an exclusive online community for healthcare professionals only. Open social platforms are not designed for this purpose nor do they offer a reliable format for doctors to participate. While the comments may cast a lasting shadow, such platforms are good for progressive suppliers too. They exploit them for confidence building, knowledge transfer, speedy awareness, product promotion, extended reach and more.Fire Drill: Standalone healthcare professionals like Tara need to adapt to changing times to deploy higher management expertise — which no longer equates with sheer common sense. With rising business complexities, the role of professional management is becoming increasingly critical in making informed decisions. Final choice must pass all fire tests — framework covering a host of ‘what if’ scenarios and all known ‘what can go wrongs’. With higher stakes, the risks are also higher. Investing almost a crore rupees is not a joke. It is imperative for Tara and Shiv to walk-through many clinical, operational, commercial and legal considerations supported by capable business minds. Robust risk management requires all these incorporated into detailed contracts, AMCs, buyback clauses, warranty terms, liquidation damages (separate for timely delivery and installation), followed by a performance guarantee with a payment retention clause for a defined period post-installation.You need to become a devil’s advocate on after-sales support — with strict SLAs that may extend to demand uptime guarantee, back up/ full replacement and even damages for lost time/business. None of this would have been unreal had Tara smartly exercised her buying power. After all, we do not set up the fire station after the fire breaks out.Team-Up: The fate of every business is increasingly linked to that of many other businesses, all of which must collaborate effectively in order for each to thrive. While standalone providers like Tara cannot match the buying power of large chains, beyond individual capabilities they need to come together to enable value through peer networks. It is already late for a conscious shift in orientation of doctors to collaborate.With over 80 per cent of hospitals having less than 30 beds and over 95 per cent being family owned (mostly doctor owned), the clinical bandwidth for Tara and the likes is always stretched between patient-care, practice management, hospital/clinic administration and business management. Effective physician time deployed by the already poor per capita doctor ratio is further reduced due to the weak orientation and small scale to set up structures, robust business processes and advanced business automation. Professionals like her must open their minds to find and adopt better ways to judiciously deploy their clinical prowess and maximise time for patients.One model is to join hands with peers to foster a shared services group; that will cut doctors’ administrative and management workload. The journey will start with teething troubles and transition may be painful, but once up and running it will create grounds for improved practices and operational excellence. This will introduce much-needed specialisation in the small healthcare set-ups.Tara may extend its benefits to effective sourcing, group contracts, vendor management and enable extensive use of latest IT for better practice management, cost savings and improved focus on patient care. Beyond the traditional ways of secrecy and keeping business details behind opaque walls, the new normal requires doctors to draw their compe-titive advantage from professionally run set-ups with better patient care.One-Stop Info: Healthcare is highly information intensive. Hence, a mention about the need to create a multi-purpose central information station for professionals like Tara. It is rather sad that even the best care givers cannot list all available options of any medical product. I am perturbed by the quantum of a doctor’s time wasted in chasing information. Tara did not have a purchase department at her disposal to research and summarise the options for her — leave aside perform comparisons of specifications etc. Even with admin support, this activity is duplicated at thousands of places involving lakhs of doctor-hours across India.To get to the evolved state, we must all pool structured information in a standardised manner to achieve desired time productivity for our doctors. While I suggested a shared services group in the previous point, we also need to make it cost-effective — constraining deployment of clinical expertise for every medical specialty. Instead, the sustainable solution lies in facilitated-but-direct-connect between providers and suppliers. Firsthand interface is important for technology transfer and ongoing clinical support.Why standardised in one place? It is estimated that there are over 30 million items in the healthcare supply chain of which over 10 million undergo changes every year. We have to treat every specialist like Tara as the CEO of the integrated enterprise of Indian healthcare; for whom we ensure ease of access of relevant information (24x7 without the need to ask for it) to make it productive to refer, compare and apply. And also provision in-context messaging to the right person; without the need to maintain and search for contact details of the ever-transitioning staff.Company A must provide to Tara, live, self-help information available on-demand with structured user support and service protocols. This will be a fix for the erratic attitudes of A’s staff, and delink variations in personal interpretation of issues. There should be one version of the truth right from A’s business leaders to users like Tara. We have to move away from situational inconsistencies to a process-based and accountable approach. So much more can be achieved with such collective information assets.In conclusion, I urge Tara and Company A to seek mutual alignment that retains balance of power both before and after the purchase. The writer is MD, INHX (Indian Healthcare Exchange). He is a keen analyst of the healthcare industry with primary focus on supply chain, medical devices and patient experience(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 16-06-2014)
Read More
I have to admit that the reality quotient of an event like this happening at a clinic near you is very high. There are multiple ways to view a bond that exists between the manufacturer and the end user. A short-term, tactical view makes the consumer feel really special for a certain period of time but the wheels come off rather quickly. These are situations where the consumer is made to believe that he or she is the focal point, and the manufacturer will bend backwards to deliver on every promise. Surely, this has happened to all of us at some point in time. This is the classic case of the friendly neighbourhood salesman who seems to know, and exhibits high empathy about, all the housekeeping woes. His engaging persona makes the housewife forget that questions around the after-sales service are the most pertinent. The same housewife ends up repenting at leisure when calls go unanswered at a toll free customer service number.Thankfully, there is also a long-term strategic partnership approach. However, this can only be successful if the value systems are similar. Dr Tara Chaitanya has a very strong sense of values, deep regard for her patients, and is completely non-hierarchical in her approach to her patients. It is the deep sense of commitment that she has to her profession that has led her to upgrade to a top of the line equipment. Tara believes that her values are shared by the people she deals with and has given the ‘benefit of doubt’ to Tambe, Awasthi and team despite having been let down by them consistently. She is clearly focused on the long-term strategic nature of the partnership. Tambe and his team, however, are short-term in their approach and have a very different value system to Tara’s. I am certain he will listen to the good doctor patiently, apologise profusely, blame his team and ensure an immediate fix. A case of tactical fire-fighting which has manifested itself in multiple interactions with Company A that Tara has had in the past. The very fact that they have secretly let loose a beta version of the software for their own R&D need, is a clear violation of the bedrock of all value-based relationships, that is, integrity. Integrity is the glue that binds all relationships — personal or professional, short-term or long. I have no doubt that this partnership will stay on rocky terrain as the value systems are at opposite ends of the spectrum.Is it easy to determine whether two parties share the same sense of values? Not very difficult if one does the due diligence right at the outset. This will help nip a long-term problem in the bud. That said, one might still have to interact or partner with people with a different sets of values. In such situations, one has to follow a few rules.Rule 1: Rely on the written word and not on verbal commitment. Even more so in the case of a seller’s market, which seems to be the problem in this instance. Tara should have been concerned when none of the three companies showed a sense of urgency and insisted on a written service agreement with clear penalties. Sometimes there is reluctance to so commit, hence Rule Two... Rule 2: Negotiate from a position of strength. This might not always be possible but enforce as soon as it does become possible — like when Tara upgraded to the new machine. The company was in a hurry, she was not. She was suffering from the ‘recency’ effect of having dealt with a good engineer and a year of hassle free service and hence got entrap-ped again. So then, rule number three....Rule 3: The organisational values supersede individual commitment. The occasional positive experience with an individual often overshadows the underlying non-caring organisational attitude. It is very important to de-link the two and take an impassionate call.Beyond the value conflict, this case also touches upon the lack of diversity that exists in business relationships in India with the male being the dominant force. This issue is real and enters the economic landscape from its socio-cultural roots. My advice to Tara: Don’t allow seeming gender vibes to distract you as it will limit your ability to stay focused on the larger picture where, as a consumer, you have to get the highest level of service. Gender taunting is a bait which is best ignored. So, listen to Tambe’s side of the story, but stay focused on balancing out the value equation! The author is vice president, marketing & commercial, Coca-Cola India and South West Asia(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 16-06-2014)
Read More
Dr Tara Chaitanya was numb with shock. The Rs 65-lakh ultrasound imaging machine that had just been installed promised to be a lemon. She had no idea what her next move could be. About 16 months ago she had asked herself again and again: Am I risking too much too soon?Now, as she stared at the machine she would not believe that poor service, poor selling skills and poor attitude on the part of the vendor had inhibited her. But Tara had been on a performance high, so that anything less than the best was unthinkable, for even her research and her academics had propelled her towards excellence. Tara had raised her mind towards women’s health, and Rs 65-75 lakh was worth the cause, even if she had to borrow. She had seen the hesitation and social conditioning of women, the way girls were brought up, the inhibition that surrounded women’s health and consequently the mountain of superstition, hearsay and approximations that had compounded their health. Empowering women to know their bodies and their health needs was supreme to Tara, ranking above many other offerings of life.She had worked 12 years, and of these seven in public hospitals, deliberately choosing them at first over the glossy private ones. The experience she gained catapulted her to heights of research, even she had not imagined. Encouraging her was her husband who taught her to fulfil dreams no matter how lofty and if at all she looked back in doubt, he urged her onward. Then, she had moved to private hospitals as those were the only ones that had high-end equipment. She had marvelled at the intelligence and agility of these machines and what they promised. But soon she felt trapped in the private hospitals’ revenue target tyranny. Tara was a people’s doctor, she spent time listening to her patients and this improved the quality of her scans. But her employers at the Orient Hospital pressed their consultants to increase revenue per hour by reducing contact time per-patient, and, of course, steadily increasing consultation fee. The latter made it tough for the lower income patient to even consider good healthcare. In parallel, her own plea for quality of medical investigations was both laughed at and aggressively discouraged at Orient. Her scans took perhaps the longest time, and her reports were very detailed. But then, she also came to be trusted among the specialists, many of whom advised their patients to go only to her.Tara then decided to set up her own clinic to meet her own quality standards, patient expectations and also create space for a few needy patients every day. She contacted three reputed manufacturers of ultrasound imaging machines. Since medical school, and thereafter during her 15-year career including seminars and overseas fellowships, she had worked with several brands of scan machines — from monochrome to colour displays, from 2D to 3D to 4D-capable machines, and every kind of sophisticated feature. She was a natural with almost all of them.The machine she wanted needed to have spirometric capability, N-D and M-D imaging, and a specific minimum set of probes to be able to accomplish different types of scans. These features were offered in the highest end machines of a few MNC vendors. Comparing notes with fellow doctors, Tara shortlisted vendors A, B and C, all reputed MNC giants. Her calibre and her dream matched the excellence of these machines.A’s machine was called the AA-SW13, B’s offering was the BS232 and C’s model was the CCU-X. All were upwards of Rs 55 lakh. As they always did, Tara and her husband Shiv, a senior ad agency director, debated the purchase decision. Shiv: You are trying to set up a clinic with the S-Class Merc equivalents, and on feature and price, they are even like the Maybach. Why not start with something a little lower? Dr Tara: Then, I will miss being able to do some of the critical scans that I want to offer. For some patients, these might be the difference between knowing exactly what to do next, and a ‘can’t say for sure’ report. Then again, the equipment is crucial to my continued research. The precision of its measurements will improve my inferences and, hence, eventual diagnosis. I will put in my life’s savings, take a loan, do whatever it takes, but I wish to buy the best.Shiv: If you are so clear, then, we just go and buy the machine! Tara’s feedback-seeking discussions with her peers and seniors showed that products of A and B were somewhat superior to C in sophistication and features. Thanks to all those medical conferences, Tara had the coordinates of all the equipment companies and their sales heads, and she assumed that she could connect easily with them. Three days later company A’s regional sales manager responded. Sameer Sequeira sent brochures with his recommendations. As for B and C, a week passed without any response from them. Tara had to call them up a second and third time to set up the meeting! Eventually she got through to B’s regional sales head Mr T.T. Bala. Tara explained, “I have used your BS214 at Orient but would like to know more about all your top-end machines, like your BS232, which you had showcased at the Bangalore seminar in July.” Bala said he would have someone come and meet her. But not until nine days did a man from B called her. Deepak Dillon, a junior sales person, called Tara to fix a date for the meeting; then he called her again to reschedule it. For a sale that was going to be upwards of Rs 55 lakh, to a doctor who his RM knew, from a company that prided itself for its quality and finesse, Dillon arrived 95 minutes late without an apology.Dr Tara: Perhaps Mr Bala has briefed you? I am keen to know about your BS232 model. But is this your only model with these features?Dillon: I think so. Did you not pick up our brochures at the conference?Dr Tara (somewhat surprised): I did, but I was also wanting to look at the lower priced machines, which supports these same features.Dillon: I will have to check. I was told you wanted information on the 232. Check? Was that why they had scheduled and rescheduled the meeting? Not sure what his designation was, Tara asked for his card. He did not hand it to her, he placed it on the table and pushed it towards her. He was a junior sales person. He was not engaging in the sale nor interested, she felt. Dr Tara: What is the price of the 232?Dillon: They must have told you a price. It all depends on the exact configuration you want.Dr Tara: I just told you my requirement. It is exactly what I told Mr Bala 10 days ago. Please come back with the price and also details of your other machines with similar features.Dillon said he would call her and left. A week passed and there was no response, whereupon Tara again called Bala.Dr Tara: A gentleman from your office met me and was to get back with price and warranty details for the 232. I have been waiting... Mr Bala: Oh! He did not get back to you? We have been busy with our reviews last few days. I will have somebody call you back with the price.Next day, Rajesh Bambote called Tara with the price for only the 232, but not about other machines she had asked about. “Oh! But I am not from the sales or product division. I will have someone from sales call you,” said Bambote. Yet, what he quoted for the 232 was higher than what her senior had paid for it recently. It did not make sense to Tara. She was going to fund a part of the purchase with a bank loan. But Bala said this was their best price, with no discounts for paying full upfront. He said he would get back but he did not. Tara was now quite frustrated with Company B. She narrated all this to her husband. “What an unproductive meeting! They don’t seem interested, Shiv. After all the calls, meetings and SMS-es I still don’t know much more than what they told me in Bangalore! So much for my time and follow-ups. It is a Rs 65-lakh sale for them... Do all you corporate sell like this? The guy was unprepared, had no information, was not enthusiastic about getting back with data, and he does not respond to my SMS. Bala says he is busy with appraisals! I am confused. What am I to do? Ultrasound machines are bought only by calling an organisation. You can’t buy them at a drug store...” she ended sourly.Read Analysis: Dr Chandra Rosha & Rekha Ranganathan break-page-break Shiv: Sales guys are usually armed with every kind of data. They also follow-up. I too am surprised that they are not eager.Dr Tara: I wonder if it’s got to do with me being a woman. It’s like when I had gone to buy the air conditioners for my clinic, till you landed up, the shop guys hardly gave me options on the models, or compared features, nothing. But when you joined us, it was, ‘condenser, compressor, anti bacterial sir’, ‘Yes Sir’, ‘Certainly, Sir’, ‘three bags full, Sir!’ chairs were brought out, the soft drinks offered..... Shiv: I know what you mean... but this is India. There is a set attitude you get to see. Dillon, Bambote must be really poor salespersons... Dr Tara: And Bala? He knows I am serious about buying. Yet he sends a junior fellow? The chap was clueless, disinterested, cancels the meeting twice, comes late, does not even apologise or explain, then comes with no information... has no price offs to offer. Dr Kalra bought the 232 6 per cent cheaper and on instalment. I am willing to pay upfront and he has no cash discount ? Why so? Does not have a nice ring to it, Shiv. They quote nearly Rs 2 lakh higher than what they have offered Kalra! And they are not even following up, I am the one who’s been chasing them.Shiv: Don’t be eager to buy. Let us look at C and A. Let me join the next time you have your discussions.Company A’s regional head Sameer Sequeira had forwarded Tara’s queries to his colleague Akhilesh Awasthi who called on Tara and Shiv. Tara was most familiar and comfortable with A’s AA-SW13. But it was priced far higher than B’s 232. Shiv growled a bit and Awasthi threw in a small discount. Shiv twisted him for a second year’s warranty to be added within the negotiated price. So far, so good. But the machine’s cost was still well above Tara’s budget, especially when the three types of probes were taken into consideration. Sequeria did not reply, but Awasthi e-mailed her: 50 per cent advance payment for a delivery date, which was two months away. Shiv refused the offer. Only 10 per cent against order, and balance on delivery, another 3 per cent off on price, he pushed. Awasthi laughed happily and agreed feigning reluctance. Tara confirmed her order but she pondered over the unusually restrained, unyielding nature of the sales people. She was buying a very expensive equipment in a difficult economic time, and had expected them to be eager to sell. Brand B had been more like “here are our terms, take it or leave it”. Brand A would have done the same had not her husband joined the table, but it rankled that Sequeira had chosen not to interact or respond to her mails. Nine days before the delivery date Tara called Awasthi to check. She wished to have the room assessed before installation for any detail. His reply was, “We will be there.” On the promised day, despite having taken advance payment, Company A did not deliver! Tara could not help feeling let down. That they did not even call her the day before to tell her they were delayed, bothered her. She had paid... they owed her that much courtesy. Tara called Awasthi, and he said, “Yes, there has been some delay in despatch from Steonus (the country of origin), and, then, it also got stuck in Customs.” Read Analysis: Dr Chandra Rosha & Rekha RanganathanThree weeks later, the machine was delivered but no installation plan was shared. Tara had to call Awasthi who said, “I will look into it.”Dr Tara: You are going to ‘look into it’ now? I thought you would have a ready answer for something that is in your watch!”Awasthi: There are so many orders, what all will I remember?Wow... Awasthi’s voice now had an edge! Something told Tara this was the beginning of a very bad experience. Two days later, she called Awasthi and he said, ‘man is on the way’. For its top-end machine, Company A sent a very junior person. He first found fault with her clinic room, then he said the plug point should have been closer to installation point (something that Awasthi should have evaluated much earlier). With several patients waiting in the lobby, Dr Tara ran around for basics like rewiring of her electrical points. When the installation began, the UPS that A had supplied did not work adequately and each of its six batteries had to be replaced one by one.... Tara watched goggle-eyed. How could a vendor be so irresponsible? This was India, power failed and tripped more than it worked! Having a UPS was part of existence! Shiv, who had been watching her growing angst day after day, said to her, “Do you know, that is how UPS manufacturing is a thriving industry in India, with a market size of $1,316.5 million in 2014. The UPS that A has given you is a Rs 900 crore brand! Damn! Nothing works at all in India!”Tara: Some things do work, Shiv. We just have a deep-rooted culture of corrupt thinking. Presently, a bigger problem was waiting to be unleashed. Several keys on the keyboard of the touch screen machine would not respond to her inputs. Tara quailed.The installation engineer pressed a few keys too and said, “It is new equipment, that is why.. Just press 2-3 times... it will become all right.” Tara choked. “I don’t know what you are saying. How can it be normal?” And then the man said, “My job was to unbox the machine and set it up, I have done it. You please call the company and tell them...” And he left. To be continued...casestudymeera@gmail.com (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 19-05-2014)
Read More
The case brings out yet another perspective on Suyash which goes beyond the "I am good - and looking for attention" or " I am the one being wronged here" to perhaps a deep seated fear of failure. Through the conversation between Maya and Tripti it appears that Suyash throws a spanner in the works - each time he thinks the team is aligned and getting to grips with a situation. I wonder whether this is because the idea did not come from him or whether it is because he is unable to deliver to stretching goals. As leaders we are often confronted by the question — " is this trait coachable or not ?" The answer to that lies in two dimensions — one where the person might be blindsided by their actions and therefore with the opportunity to explore a different way of thinking and, with some clear feedback, is able to modify behavior to be more effective. The other dimension is a more difficult one to crack - and one which frightens managers and leaders a great deal. This is about really understanding the values, experiences and thought processes that define the individual's behavior and whether this psychological makeup is too deep seated to influence, change. As managers we can work on what can be changed. We are unfortunately not trained psychologists who can deal with the deep psychological processes. I think it is important to understand the difference between the two.At various stages in our lives we create a recipe for success — which holds us in good stead for a period of time. If however, we don't work on being contemporary and learn new skills and challenge our own thinking, we could find ourselves becoming dysfunctional and failing in our own definition of success. This is even more relevant in the corporate world. From a reading of this part of the case, it would appear that Suyash is living out a self fulfilling prophecy … "the only way to receive attention is by being disruptive" , " I can make myself important by derailing the processes - and no one is smart enough to see through me " and somewhere deep down inside is the thought that " I am a small town guy who will never be taken seriously by the organisation so attack is the best form of self defence". Perhaps his success model has been driven by " No one will call my bluff because I am clever and make it others' fault when things don't get done." Suyash knows he needs to change - but is unwilling to do so or does not know how to- that is always the conundrum of the "knowing-doing" gap.Disruptive people also work on the basis that they can absolve themselves of the responsibility for their actions by following the decisions of others — and then making them look bad when things go wrong. This could be the game that Suyash is playing here. By making a habit out of being negative he is in fact denying his responsibility for being constructive and accountable for results.It is time for Maya and the leadership in Morro to have the tough conversations with Suyash. I am concerned about the gender issue that Maya is bringing up. Is this something she is actually experiencing or is it a part of Morro's culture where" Morro" equals "men"? Either ways, I can empathise with Maya who is doubtless concerned about her own success and growth in the company. My recommendation to Maya though is that she deals with Suyash as a professional and fair minded manager who is driving for results. She needs to set the organisation context and expectations clearly. The critical thing is that she should do so consistently, documenting conversations and providing feedback at every stage. Yes, she needs to find Suyash's strengths, but she needs to be steadfast in her resolve to hold him to account. Suyash is probably biding his time, and taking refuge in the fact that the leaders in Morro will never bite the bullet and have the tough conversation with him. Afterall that has been his formula for success! And that has been the pattern exhibited by Apurva and Rao both of whom seemhappy to pass the buck.It is somewhat concerning to me that Morro as an organisation allows managers to be abusive and creative an uncomfortable work environment. This is not sustainable as the newer generations will not accept the traditional managers. I am surprised that the organisation has turned a blind eye to this. And yes, while the belief a couple of decades ago was that a woman should be "like men" in order to succeed - that is long since gone. There will always be differences in how men and women lead - but ultimately strong leadership is about much more than that. It is about balance. At the leadership table it is the professionalism and quality of thought and contribution that matter. Leadership is about building successful teams and creating a sustainable legacy for success. All professionals go through testing times, and those that succeed are the ones that are able to bring about the balance and be willing to challenge their formulae for success. I think the leadership challenge for Morro is clear. They need to examine their values and culture, what they expect of their line leaders and how they manage the performance management process. They also need to think about what support structures they have in place to help employees make meaning of the success criteria in the company and how they can adapt their own styles. At an individual level we need to understand that we are adults and are held to account. As we define success, we must understand that there are choices to be made. Suyash needs to accept that he cannot possibly succeed in the long run without taking responsibility for his actions and that sooner or later he will outlive his welcome in Morro or any professional organisation. Maya needs to understand that if she is unable to go beyond her own insecurities, then she can at least use the people systems and processes effectively to set the standards of performance. If she is able to motivate Suyash to grow and develop beyond his limitations — she would have "turned him around" and if he chooses not to, then she makes the tough call based on facts and evidence. In either case Maya stands to prove herself as a distinctive, courageous leader who does what it takes to get the best out of her people and does what is right for the organisation. The author is a regional HR director for a global company and is based in Singapore. She is passionate about people and organisation development (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 01-07-2013)
Read More
Each one of us is playing a role. Our position, gender, genes, disposition, etc., determine what character we will be. Accordingly, Tripti, Suyash, Maya, Apurva are playing their respective parts. Let us examine the imperatives and the message that their roles contain.Tripti, the trainer, by virtue of her situation has two jobs. One, to provide her observations about training and two, to 'counsel' Suyash's prospective boss, Maya — because she has asked her for guidance; but not the present boss, Apurva, because he has not asked for it.Why do we not find Apurva asking for feedback on his personality, even though he is the direct recipient of Suyash's behaviour? And unlike Apurva, why do we not see Maya, Suyash's future boss telling Tripti to 'change' Suyash, so that when she inherits him, she gets to deal with an 'improved' team member?Apurva's mind-set is "Suyash needs to change. An outside agency, that is, the trainer has been engaged to make that happen". Apurva does not think that this could be an opportunity for some introspection. He is looking outward - the world outside of him needs to change.Maya, on the other hand, approaches Tripti, asking for inputs on self. Looking at self and wondering whether she has something that needs redeeming and addressing. She is looking at herself self vis-à-vis Suyash. She wants to understand what she can do to make things work. Where does her own personality come in the way of a productive and viable relationship? Why does she feel so jarred by Suyash.She is looking inwards - the world inside of her needs to change.Why do we see this difference in their approaches? May be what we are seeing is a gender-based differences in approach to life situations. Let us look at how men and women react to stressful stimulus: While most people are familiar with the 'fight or flight' theory, there's a new theory in town tailored just for women. Men tend to have a 'fight or flight' response to stress situations while women seem to approach these situations with a 'tend and befriend' strategy. Psychologist Shelley E. Taylor coined the phrase "tend and befriend" after recognising that during times of stress women take care of themselves and their children (tending) and form strong group bonds (befriending). Psychological Review reported that females are more likely to deal with stress by "tending and befriending",that is, nurturing those around them and reaching out to others. While men resort to fight or flight. "Women", as reported in WebMD "often seek support to talk out the emotional experience, to process what is happening and what might be done. Women like to tell their stories. Men often seek an "escape activity to get relief from stress, to create a relaxing diversion, to get away." Women typically have a larger, deep limbic system than men, which allows them to be more in touch with their feelings and better able to express them, which promotes bonding with others. Let us also look at social conditioning, a significant contributor, to behaviour and attitude. As males are growing up they are urged to excel and become powerful, to never show their emotions, to be tough, independent, demanding, aggressive and good problem solvers. And women are taught to be tolerant, to be patient, to work for others' comfort, to accede defeat to their significant ones. These are the reasons why we see women ask for help, talk of their problem because they do not feel that seeking help is a sign of weakness. They do not think that being unsure is a 'wrong'. Hence, they do not mind "asking for direction", on the road or otherwise. But neither approach in isolation is complete and wholesome. Both have their inherent strengths and weaknesses. In Hindu mythology there is a concept of 'ardhnarishwar'. 'ardh' meaning half, 'nari' meaning female. (And 'ishwar' stands for God). This word may have several interpretations. However, one, that explains synergy and the 'ideal state of being' is, that it is not the either/or (male or female ) approach towards life that is correct or complete, it is the right balance of male and female attributes, that create a perfect harmony. Needless to say that the best of both, is the best.This difference in 'wiring' in men and women will always remain. It will always result in difference in thinking, feeling and behaviour. Yet, in order to mitigate and correctly channelise the inherent and induced behaviour, training, coaching and counselling is done. Moreover, right environment needs to be provided to mitigate skewed behaviour and its effect.In this light, let us understand the approach that all four role players — Apurva and Maya, Suyash and Tripti - demonstrate. Apurva: His personality is rather easy and simple to understand. He is the 'boss-man'. He will yell, abuse, growl and get things done. He will be disliked and feared. He will expect others to change. He will have no such expectations from self.Maya: She is the 'woman-boss'. She appears to be introspective. And anyone who is introspective will often find himself/herself in a dilemma, in uncertain situations. Such people are also courageous. Why courageous? Because it takes courage to poke one's ego, be receptive to flaws that it brings and accept them. If one also has the intelligence and determination to work on it and correct them, then it is a precious capability.Even if we do not get caught in man-woman perspective, it is clear from the case that Apurva and Maya have totally different orientation towards Suyash. Where does all this leave Tripti? From a trainer's perspective she has to let both, Maya and Apurva know that training does not change attitude. At its best, training imparts some knowledge and identifies certain areas of improvement and strengths through the observation of manifested behaviour. Based on these, the organisation has the onus of providing the right support and wherewithal to its employee(s) through training, coaching, counselling and creating the environment so that these situations become conducive to attitudinal and behavioural change.Therefore, Apurva's expectation of seeing a "new and improved Suyash" is like wanting to see a "new and improved soap" after a changed manufacturing process — an unrealistic expectation. It has to be explained to Apurva that training is not a magic wand. It is a process to observe and evaluate. Behavioural changes do not happen due to and during training. It happens later as part of the various inputs provided to the employee.With Maya, Tripti's talk is more productive. Here, she provides inputs to Maya on actual attitudinal and behavioural change and not just theory. Tripti facilitates the process of understanding and provides insight to Maya as to how the latter should be conducting herself with Suyash. What she should be saying to him. Before Maya can deal with others, she has to deal with herself. She has to instil confidence in herself, as a boss, as a professional and as person, someone who can set Suyash straight or show him the door - both confidently.This talk with Tripti will raise Maya's understanding and competence if she is able to use the conversation productively.Suyash, a male employee, is competent to an extent, but he is beset with misplaced confidence and wrong attitude. It is clear that he is an enigma to all. "Why does he do that?" They all ask. No one has ever spoken to him to gain an insight into who he is; Why does he do what he does? None of his bosses have attempted to harness his strength and control his 'derailers'. Maya may have the privilege to be the first one to get into this unknown territory. She will surely find this exercise redeeming and rewarding. Suyash also needs to hear some plain-speaking. He needs to be told with examples the behaviour he demonstrates. He should be told how and why it is difficult for others and detrimental for him. In all these years, (unlike May who once was his colleague but now expected to be his boss), he has not 'moved' but only gets 'moved'. Such people, depending on their level of maturity will either, shape up or eventually ship out. Where does all this leave improvement? What about the learnings? Well, each individual is like a bowl. A bowl lying upside down will gather nothing from the rain pouring down from the sky; but if the bowl is upright, facing the sky, it will receive the shower and fill up. The author is a HR consultant with Prabuddh Consulting. Her work involves setting up HR systems and processes, talent management via coaching, training, assessment and HR specific projects (This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-07-2013)
Read More
Change yourself… or change the world every time a challenge is encountered. This is the most common choice faced by people. In most organisational settings, when employees face conflict and are up against a potential failure they rarely think of focusing the change on themselves. The general tendency is to resolve the problem by blaming the other party and if all else fails; blame it on the lack of proper organisational systems and processes. There is an old saying that success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. This is commonly known as the "fundamental attribution error". This is considered an error because we don't internalise it. We almost always externalise it by placing the blame anywhere but on ourselves. In short, we pass judgement and jump to conclusions without trying to understand the reason.In this case, Suyash is seen as a problem person by all except Maya. What is so unique about Maya's perspective? The issue of confronting a difficult employee like Suyash and working with him is akin to taking a challenge that may lead to potential heartburn and trouble for the team. Clearly, Maya has two options. One, she can adopt a technique that has worked with Apurva, the current boss. Two, she can figure out her own style of handling Suyash. We know that Apurva has been quite harsh and hurls abuses to get work done. Apparently, Suyash has complied with Apurva. Yet, we know that Apurva wants Suyash to do more. So, if this method is not working, then what could be done? Interestingly, Maya decides to confront her fear and approaches Tripti, a trainer and a neutral observer, to get some help in channeling her thoughts. She urges Tripti to see Suyash through her lens. Though Tripti advises Maya to talk it out with Suyash, there are some insights worthy of note that can be drawn from their conversation.Is the conflict with Suyash just an interpersonal relationship gone sour or could there be structural issues?Let us understand from the point of performance appraisal and training. One issue that stands out in this case is the lack of timely and useful feedback to Suyash. Apparently, no one has ever told Suyash that the reason he is not progressing in his company is because of his attitude. This seems corroborated by Suyash's jibe that performance appraisal is like a "dark room". Typically, the appraisal systems should help organisational administrative decisions such as promotions and rewards as well as provide developmental tips for employees. Very few organisations clearly state what they want from the performance appraisal. Surprisingly, performance appraisal process that takes so much time from employees does not lead to adequate returns and hence is derided by many concerned. A good performance appraisal system should also reward bosses for helping develop their subordinates. Does the problem lie in how men and women handle their subordinates? It is possible that there could be genders differences in handling interpersonal relationships at work. Recent research suggests that while traditional management role is typically associated with masculine traits, during the time of crises feminine traits such as the ability to handle interpersonal relationships are more valued. Ironically, it sets up many female leaders for failure as it requires them to turnaround a difficult situation. Thinking from this perspective, handling a difficult employee like Suyash will require someone like Maya who seems a lot more passive than Apurva. Is workplace abuse a manly trait of getting the work done?There is nothing manly about abuse. It adds to the problem and defeats the purpose of getting the work done. Research has shown abusive supervision to have a negative influence on job performance. There are two reasons behind this. One, abused employees will be motivated to reciprocate such treatment with hostile or counterproductive work behaviour. Two, such employees will be compelled to spend effort coping with the consequences of such treatment, thereby reducing the effort that they must ideally give to their job responsibilities. The key to bringing out the best from Suyash is to make him committed to the team. Commitment is not the same as compliance. You can get anyone to comply under threats and blackmail. However, this is not likely to get the best work out of them. Apurva is already trying this and he knows that it doesn't work on Suyash. Can such a short training programme really solve the existing deep rooted problems?The training programme, which forms the backdrop in this case, is considered a panacea for all ills. Let's consider a few things. First, we have to take into account whether the training programme was clear in its stated objective? Many a times we take training programme as a paid vacation and people go back to their respective routines once they are back to work. Will it happen with Suyash too? We don't know. If Apurva had told Suyash that his performance is suffering because he is not a team player and he needs to work on his collaborative skill set, then probably the performance appraisal will look less of a "dark room" setting for Suyash. Second, we need to link the employees' developmental needs with the goals of training programme and evaluate the impact on an employee post-training. Ideally, interventions during training programme needs to be sustained in the workplace. Again, the bosses are responsible for supporting the new learnings gleaned by the employee from the training programme. In summary, the boss is responsible for providing developmental feedback, suggest relevant training, and then help in transfer of learning at the workplace. Any disconnect across these three independent actions will hurt the employee as well as the organisation. Tripti seems to be on the right path by suggesting that Maya should have an honest talk with Suyash about her expectations once he joins her team. Most likely, Suyash will see Maya's logic and mend his ways. If not, he has no one to blame other than himself for the mess he is in. The writer is an assistant professor of Organisational Behaviour at the Indian School of Business. His current research interests include understanding the role of employee personality and its' impact on individual and team performance(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-07-2013)
Read More
Maya Kini slowed down as she headed for the coffee tent, her arms laden with a tray with a pot of coffee and some muffins. Tripti and Suyash were standing on the steps leading up and sharing a joke, probably. Suyash was saying something to Tripti in his characteristic sutradhar style, narrating now, pointing to something now, narrating some more, then cracking a joke.... Tripti was laughing listening to him mimic something. ….when Maya caught up with them. Suyash greeted her exuberantly between bouts of laughter, and said, “Okay, you take over, Maya. I can stand here forever and bore her with our inane office anecdotes!” and made off towards the coffee service. Maya greeted Tripti warmly, but lingered, unsure of what to say. “Hey, glad to see you! Uh... wanted to have a 20-odd minute chat with you. Tell me when, and I will be there.”Tripti: How about now? This coffee break is for that! Besides, we reconvene only after lunch, so...They took their trays and chose a table outside the tent. After some preamble…Maya: The training has ended today. I know you will be making evaluations, etc. Umm... this is difficult, so bear with me. I am about to inherit one of the players, Suyash. I want you to help me. I am unable to deal with the fact that he will be on my team. (Laughs nervously) I know, I know! And this is what makes it doubly difficult for me. What has been your finding — to be fair, both with regard to me and him. Tell me what I need to do to make this combo work, to stop cribbing, to be resilient and, you know, deal with this sensibly? I am sure you have insights that will help. Tripti: Technically, I am not supposed to share but I am allowed some liberties as part of my professional judgement. So, yes, we can talk. Maya: Oh God! I hope I am not breaking rules and stuff? Ha ha ha… okay. Tripti, I come from a different point in space and time. This is also what makes it difficult to talk about this with a conventional HR, because what I want to say is about what I am and less to do with Suyash or anybody else.I will come to the point without the frills and scallops, it will be easier, ha ha ha... I have been really desperate to not have Suyash on my team, and I reacted very badly when told he was moving to my team, because his negativity kills me. I have worked with him as a colleague for the same boss when we were both consultants — that must be 2008-09-ish. He derailed, I got ahead. So, today I am team leader, he will be team player, which in itself can be upsetting for him, but that’s not the issue here. The point I am making is: I need to be able to deal with the likes of Suyash. And I am really sincere about this. Tripti: So you want to be Miss Goody-two-shoes?Maya: Oh! If that was possible! I am wired with toughened glass, which makes me difficult even for myself! But more than that, I have created some useless pickets in my mind which trip me when I am walking. ‘Negative thoughts’ is one such. I dread negative thoughts because I believe I have a propensity for them; and I think they for me. So I shudder, turn around and run for my life when I encounter them. Tripti: But I thought this is about Suyash. Why are you telling me about yourself?Maya: Because I feel we need to see Suyash through my mind. If not, there is a risk. Tripti: Leave that to me. First, we will talk about Suyash, okay? I don’t want to know about you. When I need, I will tell you.Maya: Tripti, just a little bit, please. Remember, I came to you, so I get to call the drift of this chat. (Tripti smiles) All I ask is that you break my defences about Maya and Suyash, and see where I need to change.Tripti: We’ll see. I have been watching him, and Suyash does seem to delight in making people look small, inconsequential. He comes across as critical, obtrusive, someone who will see how something cannot be done…Maya: Oh! That’s harsh! He is not vicious like that; he is just negative. Or maybe he has a small mean streak. I never noticed it myself but two others labelled him thus. Yes, true that he will tell you why something cannot be done, why it should not be done, why everything is a fraud, why it is based on cunning minds... he is like that. Oh God! Maybe he is just like me?Tripti: Why don’t I make some observations on Suyash, and you can veto them or endorse them based on your experience. Okay? Alright, here’s the first: a) ‘I know deep in my heart that I am not good but must project otherwise, confidently.’Maya: The Suyash I know believes he is good, except his true goodness is never visible because upfront he does present his negative views. I’m not sure why he does that; maybe because what he sees is so negative. Who knows? Tripti: b) ‘I can become popular by being witty. Being superficial is (i) good and (ii) an easy way to live.’Maya: I think it is a mask, a cover! He is not cunning, at least not in my opinion. Tripti: c) ‘I can project intelligence by giving ‘motherhood statements’ and many will remain fooled for always.’ break-page-breakMaya: Ha ha ha… Yes, he does make these huge ‘motherhood statements’. But don’t be fooled. I have felt that he wants to be accepted or known or recognised, maybe. Suyash is not out to fool anyone. He is a small town guy with a desire to be liked.Tripti: Will you say his knowledge is may be superficial? Maya: I wouldn’t say that; his knowledge is not deep enough, but it is very good knowledge. In my view, even as he stares at facts, he is hammering them down as ‘wrong, can’t be, useless’. A lot of his problem lies in the way he sees things.Tripti: d) Value system ‘iffy’? Maya: No, he is not valueless, but I’d say, ‘can be swayed’. For example, he could break the signal lights and laugh it off. Small stuff, a bit of a collegian approach. But never on big stuff. Tripti: Is honesty a lesson he has to learn?Maya: Look I don’t know him that well that I can carry a flag for him. What I can say is that I don’t think he is dishonest. But I do not work with him currently; he was in my group four years ago. Then we moved to different offices. I have been at the Shoulder Road office for the past nine months. I meet him socially, at joint meetings on Vision and Values, stuff like that, where you can freewheel. Occasionally we meet at lunch, with the old group. But I don’t have to work with him. Once we had a joint proposal to submit to a waste management company. He threw one spanner after another into the works; rejected all our ideas; went slow on his part of the work, which was critical for us to deliver the strategy too; dug in his heels; blamed the client for not revealing information… In short, he was infuriating. He doesn’t do his part of the work, but sits around throwing blame. Meanwhile, the others complete the work.Tripti: So it can be said that he adopts the ‘I can’t do’ tack, more because he needs to work on his ‘how to do’ skills.Maya (after thinking for a long time): Is that how you see it? I am not sure. This is clearly your skill area, but what I have seen is this: If you present a method, he will want to change that. He will want to air seven different ways of doing the same thing. Then, even if you accept one of those, he will instantly tell you why that is a lame duck and why there is a point that everyone is missing.And, yet, when the question is first thrown open to the group, he will not list down the problems or difficulties that he perceives so that everyone can think about it. He will wait for you to suggest something and then demolish it. break-page-breakTripti pondered. Her conclusion so far had been that Suyash was insecure, that he wanted to be liked, wanted to be popular, and likely sought short cuts (she didn’t have any proof for this, but his general demeanour seemed to indicate as much). She also felt that he was incapable of good execution, or what Maya called ‘implementation’ in consulting language. So, felt Tripti, it was likely that Suyash sought to show off his talent through just the use of words. So far she was happy with her talk with Maya. It was clear that Maya simply feared a slowing down with Suyash added to her baggage. But Maya was also very clear about her need for help with how to handle this. Tripti needed to turn this around now.Tripti: Okay Maya, tell me, when Suyash acts difficult, how does it make you feel? Maya: To be honest, he is not working with me yet, but I have interacted with him at corporate meetings, etc., and it is extraordinary how frustrated I feel with his attitude. Just when we think we are making progress, seeing the light at the tunnel’s end, Suyash will say in his soft voice, ‘guys, lest we pat our backs too easily, has it struck you...’ blah! You know, Tripti, it is not his objections but his style of presenting them! He will say nothing when everyone is frothing at the mouth, but just when we all agree and decide to move to point number two of the agenda, Suyash will interject softly, eyebrows raised, looking grim and gloomy like bad weather! Oh Gawwwwd... how he slows me down!Tripti: Maya, have you come across anyone who you have seen dealing with Suyash or with people like him admirably?Maya: I don’t know about admirably, but Apurva accomplishes his work. Is his approach right or not? Ask Apurva that. But Suyash hates him.Tripti: Yet Suyash does as he is told to, no? Why? Also, if it is effective, then why do you not deal with him the same way?Maya: Just because it works does not mean it is not broke! It can be said to work if it works for Suyash too. Apurva has been his boss for five years and Suyash has not moved anywhere, neither up nor down; he is now moving sideways!As for Apurva’s methods, he uses abusive language, complete gutter language. Can I use the same tactics on Suyash? I do not use abusive language. Women do not use abusive language, and never on subordinates. Never. Women do not ogle, sexually harass, tease, nothing. And women’s management style is called ‘soft’. Gosh I hate all this... (After a short pause) I asked two other chaps at work how come Apurva was so abusive. They said it was a man thing; that men talk to each other like that. So you get work done abusing your subordinate’s mother and sister, eh? Give me a break, Tripti! If this is ‘effective’, then I am a monkey’s uncle!Tripti: Now think about this and reply: If you decide to be effective with people like Suyash, what do you need to learn for it? Something that is neither soft nor vicious?Maya: Look, I don’t know. I go to work because I enjoy it, because I want to build organisations and systems. Because I want to earn some money, to be reasonably safe. I don’t have any delusions of greatness. I love people, I like many of them at my workplace. Those I do not like, mercifully, I don’t need to deal with them. Suyash is okay socially, as I told you. Introducing him into my team sounds like bad news only because the rhythm is going to wobble...I think I want Suyash to know this is what he does. I want him to know that he can be very good if he doesn’t trample all over and treat work like a joke. He needs to get serious! And I do not have it in me to play mom. Nobody mothers me, nobody says, ‘oh you poor thing’. I take it on the chin, okay? But I examine criticism and correct myself. Teach me how to talk tough without abusing, without sounding like a surrogate mom, without also compromising with my essential nature where I cannot be rude or abusive.Tripti: Maya, you have just solved your own problem. And quite effectively, too. Do just what you have said.Call him. Sit him down and tell him exactly what you said to me. Tell him: ‘Suyash, I want you to know that this is what you do.’ Tell him, ‘I want you to know that you can be very good if you do not trample all over and treat work like a joke.’ Tell him that the proof of how it bothers others, especially bosses, is the fact that for the last x number of years, he has not ‘moved’.Tell him, as the talk progresses, what your expectation of a team player is. Tell him the good you have seen in him, but add that he needs to get serious. That you do not want disruption, delay and dithering. Tell him nobody mothers anyone in the office, but abusive talk will not be condoned either. Woman to woman, I think it is important to acknowledge wrongdoing and stand up against it… abusive language does to men what sexual harassment does to women — it demeans them, intrudes into and demolishes their inner space.Your style need not come from traditional management styles. In this case, definitely not, since it has not helped Suyash’s career or organisation building. I often wonder if the abusive management style is a learned cultural behaviour or a natural one. As a parent, I can say it does not bring out the best in a child. I don’t see why it should in an adult.A nurturing style is eminently suitable and is the bedrock on which HR is supposed to stand. If it gets to be seen as mothering, I will take pride and not feel ashamed or less. Go for it. Men use authority to create hierarchical management styles to elicit obedience and supplication.Go, be a natural… But there is a risk. You will be perceived as possessing less leadership ability than men and hence not having leadership skills…. Or even ‘trying to be a man’! After all, didn’t this very world refer to Margaret Thatcher as the ‘best man’ in Great Britain? casestudymeera (at)gmail(dot)com Read Businessworld case studies on Facebook(This story was published in BW | Businessworld Issue Dated 15-07-2013)
Read More
