Debbil is in a crisis. And the crisis is likely to grow. The crisis is not that times are bad or that change is necessary. The crisis is in the way decisions are taken and communicated in the organisation. The crisis is that those responsible for taking decisions at Debbil, are reluctant to take them, and even more reluctant to communicate them. There is a sense of a Nato roundtable about the Debbil management. The decisions regarding letting people go and whom to let go are not decisions that are arrived at through intuitive brainstorming. These decisions have to be arrived at through predictive measurements. You need to be able to predict the crisis and you need to know what your options will be in the crisis. Once you do such evidence-based, predictive management, you are able to prepare the organisation for difficult times. There is no sense of panic when there is preparedness. Preparedness comes from two processes — participation and communication. Participation of the line managers in the decisions regarding their teams is extremely important. Participation of the teams in evolving strategies to cope with the difficult times allows the organisation to have an owned strategy. Such participation generates trust. In Debbil, the implementation of the decision does not have any sense of ownership. As there is no ownership of the difficult decision, no one plans the implementation. No one realises who will lose what. No one empathises with the people. The cost of a ‘no-empathy' environment is fear and paranoia. When people are afraid, they want to survive. To survive, they feel that they have to bargain, they have to be angry and they have to pay a cost. This decreases the motivation of the whole team and not just for those who get laid off. The cost to the organisation is not just a few bad days. The cost is a culture of watching your back. Guarding against the competition, watching your turf, claiming success and activities for yourself and not your team — a paranoid team is a painful place to work in. It stops achieving, and is only hurtful. The second process that is deficient at Debbil is that there is no formal process of communication of difficult decisions. Obviously, Debbil is not letting go of people the first time, its managers have done this before. Even small organisations have a process of how to let people know that they are being asked to leave. You do not create a vacuum of information for theories to raise their head. The lack of communication implies that people are second guessing. This guessing leaves everyone helpless. The decisions are then allowed to be ‘inadvertently' let out. The helpless person then personalises. This implies that each person in the organisation, whether they express it or not, for a moment thinks, "Is it me?" Lack of communication leads to an environment of personalising and people cannot help but think the worst. Imagine a whole workforce reflecting on its weaknesses even for a moment. The effort to create an environment of communication acknowledges the team as mature and as partners in the organisation. The team should live in the belief that we will know. This sense of being assured of things not being hidden cannot be gained by some people knowing and others not. Partisan communication creates pockets of loyalty and security, which create pockets of influence. Pockets of influence create pockets of resistance, which are a cost. No strategy of saving an organisation is going to work if it affects the spirit of the organisation. The time spent to rebuild the spirit of the organisation is going to be so costly that it will stifle all processes to an unbearable silence. Now, let us come to the premise that people respond differently to the same situation. Yes, we all do. The way we interact with our context is determined by our experiences and the way we think. The way we think about ourselves, the way we think about the future, and the way we think that the world perceives us. Varmaji knows that he is valued. He knows he is valued not because of the nature of the present communication but for the experiences he has had in the past. His sense of being valued is internalised. When there is internalisation of being valued, you feel you are able to cope with change. Your thoughts for the future are not of panic, but choices. So, Varmaji instead of being helpless is still exercising some choice in the way the events unfold. There is a sense of acceptance. This sense of acceptance comes from the knowledge that "I can survive". His view of his past experiences is not that he has had a difficult life and that no one cares for him. His view of his past experiences is that he has survived the difficult circumstances in his life. He feels that if he has survived the past, he can live the future without panicking. Of course, the fact that there was one-to-one communication, reinforced the belief that he has in himself. Dr Achal Bhagat is a consultant psychiatrist and psychotherapist at Apollo Hospital, Delhi. He is also the founder director of Saarthak, a mental health NGO. var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 30-11-2009)
Read More
Siv Krishnan drove through the crowded streets with his dentist's words echoing in his head. Siv was running 20 minutes late for his appointment, but the soft-spoken, goateed Dr Ray had said, "Don't worry, take your time. And drive carefully!"Siv pondered over Dr Ray. What made some people calm and poised, unhurried and unrushed? Ray could have, like many people, shovelled the problem right back on him — "I cannot help you if there is a traffic jam. I have other patients; you should have left earlier…" No. Dr Ray did not shovel back. How did he manage? What did he do to manage?Yet, now driving back to work, Siv himself was far from calm; in fact, he felt he was driving into the eye of the typhoon he had abandoned yesterday, when, exhausted by the variety of feelings unleashed before him, he had receded like a spent wave and gone home to escape the frustration and hopelessness. And now he reflected: there are people who are work-oriented — they suffer when profits fall, when brands fail; some are relationships-oriented, like Hanif — they suffer to keep family well provided; some are led by attitude, like Rishi — they see loss as a personal attack; or as a simple event that is endured, like Sunny.Debbil India, where Siv was the vice-president HR, was laying off staff. Not that recession necessarily meant lay offs, but Debbil had two very old plants where refurbishing was prohibitively expensive, neither could these be shut down. To contain the bleeding, some cost cuts were demanded by the CEO. One such was people costs.No sooner had the CEO mentioned cuts to numbers, the buzz had picked up at the company. Dissension and debate had begun between line managers and HR over the ‘list'. Siv cautioned them repeatedly: there was no such list, they would wait till the CEO had finalised the plan.If Siv thought this talk was confined to the board room, he was mistaken. Informally, the employees picked up a lot of ‘talk' and seniors began to make ‘moves'. In different parts of the organisation, groups collected and whispered sadly, angrily, and astonished. The source of ‘information' was never clear, but everyone just ‘knew' what was going on.The first trigger came from Stanley in admin, who told his assistant Murthy "cancel the indent for new furniture… 5-6 cubicles are going to fall spare next year, so…!" At lunch he let out: "Kuchh hone wala hai… Stanley has cancelled orders for new cubicles with Rodeo Modular… saying something about not being needed anymore…!" Arpita Sinha in PR took this back to her boss and said, "People are talking! I want to know if my job is under the axe, so I can start looking around!" Head of PR Josy Verghese went to Gopi Pandya, the marketing head, and said, "Unusual, but the staff are talking already! Does that mean lists are floating around without our knowledge? We must have a right to decide who stays and who does not!"Gopi: Can't be helped. (Then calling Finance) "Yaar Sanjay, next year's budget proposals are open yet, no? Replace my car, buddy! What? How do you mean? Ten managers less? Who told you?" (Then calling CEO's secretary) "Arre Jenny, what is this bhai? Ten managers less next year? Who is going? But the people budget is yet open, no? Of course I got the news from Finance. You mean you don't know? Arre this is disturbing Jenny, we guys need to know! So far talk was staff is being laid off…!"The sense of doom at Debbil was almost audible. A buzz was in the air. Everyone sensed something was going on, but nobody could tell what it was. Of course, the air had been thick for long with news from the US. The newspapers anyway downloaded a lot of grim news daily, with tiny boxes on ‘Doctors claim rampant increase in high blood pressure'.Last week, Kalpa Mehta had run into HR's Sirishbhai at the water fountain. Kalpa and Sirish were buddies as both took the 8.03 Borivili fast. "You had better look after aapro Dhanesh," he whispered. "He will need help, he may be asked to go." Kalpa's eyes bulged. "What makes you say so?" she asked. Sirishbhai, who balanced the payroll account every month, had been asked to calculate Dhanesh's superannuation losses if he was to leave in 2009. (It was a completely different matter that Siv was planning to migrate employees of certain tenure to a newer system.)So when Sirishbhai explained and concluded with a Q.E.D. and a clip of his fingers, Kalpa grew silent. Now what that did was highlight the doom for Kalpa, but did not tell her if she was going too. At the end of the day, people wanted to know what their own fate was going to be. So it was that she stood there in stony silence, staring at the blue star on the water cooler, much after Sirishbhai had left. var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } Elsewhere, Rohit Vaidya to admin head: "Stan, I understand you have been told to suspend car purchases? Is my name on the list?Stanley: What list? I have no access to any list. If there is a list, I too can be on it! Ha-ha! Don't worry baba, naya job to mil jaayega!Rohit to Kalpa: These guys are undermining the whole thing! No harm in being sensitive! Different times mean different decisions, but the company should be sensitive! Rationale is everywhere ‘times are bad, revenue growth poor'…but they should know the impact!Kalpa: Yes! (Narrating Dhanesh's story), Debbil is trying to minimise the impact by saying these cute things. ‘Look after him'! But do they understand Dhanesh's feelings? No, because HR is itself in denial! I am really angry!Elsewhere Sudhir Varma (Varmaji), personal secretary of the CEO, was reading a news report on swine flu. CEO Ranjan Bali had two secretaries, Jennifer, who looked after the business side of his work, and Varmaji looked after his personal life: school fees, booking tickets, managing vacations, following up booster shots, etc. Reading the article he shook his head. "‘Only 4 deaths until now, 574 deaths due to influenza everyday.' What is the meaning of ‘only 4 deaths'?"Jennifer: Meaning ‘it's not too much to cry over. No need to change your soap, you can shake all the hands you want... four deaths is no big deal; swine flu is not a real catastrophe'!Varmaji laughed. "Yes, at least we have a sense of humour. We can all die laughing. Hmmm…" This is how we are playing the lay offs at work too; ‘only 15 people are going to lose their jobs', is underplaying the feelings of those who will go, it seems, hmmm… but the environ that has been created because of improper communication has led morale to go down!The inside of CEO Bali's office was beginning to look like Madame Tussauds. His six-seven vice-presidents were leaning on different pieces of furniture in the large room. Said Bali, gravely, "This quarter's figures are bleak. I think we have no choice but to scale back." Then, clicking the projector on he said, "This is the level of costs we can afford assuming topline grows at 4 per cent. But our actual costs are way higher…!" Suggestions for cuts were tossed around. They were distracted by dialogues on who could go and who must stay… Bali said, "Let us look at what are the unviable divisions that we have, which we can do away with."One of them was trimming Maharashtra to Zones 1 and 2 as against the four zones it had earlier. That meant two of the four zonal managers would have to go. Debates raged over whether the chaps in the bigger zone should be kept and the smaller ones sacked or the guys with better potential.Later, they converged in Anil Kamat's room, ordered tea and dissected the plan. Voices carried and the heads outside that were bent over work lifted and glances were exchanged. And the buzz in the outer office grew thicker. They had been getting a whiff that Debbil was rationalising dealers; they had also heard from here and there that next year's capital proposal for cars was being cancelled… and now they were hearing anxiety ridden voices in Kamat's room.Jennifer had come by to hand over some papers and seeing the huddled heads, added her offering to the blazing fire: "Some people very close to the CEO are also slated to go!" Jennifer was not a gossip, but she had just heard this and was so overwhelmed, that just expressing this eased her heart.A ripple of emotions was generated and by 3 p.m. it was felt all over the office. Vijay Dua, who had been close to the CEO, was seized by panic when his secretary carried this tale to him. What am I to do? At 48, am I employable? I should have seen this coming. After that Kedar Sud swept Facebook with Khoj's launch, the CEO's tune has changed. Madhura is in the 12th, her admission to Oxford is confirmed… should I talk to a placement firm?Rishikesh Karnik was also close to the CEO; he had strategised the new ERP plan. He recalled the months of late nights and slogging during the implementation. Now very angry at what seemed like betrayal, he had walked into Siv's office. "Siv, I will sue the company if I am sacked. I spent 11 months of my life running all over the place, for this? Last year during the appraisal you told me that in 2009 I would be promoted! I took a housing loan on the strength of this assurance. You cannot do this! I am from a regional engineering college, that is the issue, no? You took me only so that you could show diversity in Debbil!"Siv was startled. Getting up, he hastened to pull a chair, "Sit Rishi…" But Rishi walked out, very angry.Hanif Akhtar was the apple of Bali's eyes. He was the star behind the success of the January 2009 ‘Predict the President' event, which worked wonders for Debbil's new voice recording machine ‘Awoiz'.Hanif was sad. "Siv, this lay off business… See, my father is unwell. I always wanted to serve him well; he looked after me as a single parent all his life. And today, when it is my turn to look after him… Please can you somehow, somehow keep me back? He will be so shocked if he hears I am being laid off!"Just three weeks ago, abbu had a party for our family and friends to tell them how well I am doing… He is at the age where it will hurt a lot just thinking ‘what will all those people now say?' Please try… I am like a father to him today… Keeping him happy and cheerful is what matters most to me. I know these things have no reality in the world, but this is my father's reality, no? Please, keep me till I find another job..." var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } Siv was alarmed. What did these guys know that he did not? As far as he knew, the CEO had not approved any list. They had only talked! Had the business heads been talking? But that would be patently wrong!That was when Siv, exhausted by the unexpected display of chaos, had left the office. But not before his assistant Ronnie Vaz told him what he had heard in the men's room: "Sunny Rai, a PR manager was telling Jairam Ganesh, ‘PR will be axed first, correct? Main to jaa raha hoon! I will take all my accumulated leave and go on a much-awaited deep sea diving expedition to Kev's Ledge in Mozambique. Life is for living and happiness!' Jairam, who too was there, said, ‘Don't be foolish, save the money, who knows when you will get another job?' Sunny laughed and said, ‘Money will come! Kyon, golden handshake hai na? Bas…!'"But Jairam himself was anxious. To a dazed Ronnie he had said, "My luck is bad. All the bad luck in the world seems to happen to me only. The world is cruel, Ronnie… nobody cares for anyone. Do they even stop to think what people will do without a job? Very materialistic! The big bosses don't have time to step out of their ivory towers!"Varmaji too heard all these stories. People brought it to him in the hope that he would take it to the CEO and thereby touch his heart. Picking up a contract which needed Bali's signature, he went into the CEO's room where the managing committee was assembled. As he opened the pages for Bali to sign, Siv gesticulated to which Bali said, "Yes, I have spoken to Varmaji last week. He knows."Bali had told Varmaji his services were being terminated. It was to this that Jennifer was refering to.Siv: Sorry Varmaji; I know how badly you need this job… but I really want you to understand that we are really without an option. Our choices are whittling. Forgive me please.Varmaji was a 54-year-old, single parent to three children aged 23, 16 and 12. He had lost his wife to hospital negligence when the youngest was born. Today, after 31 years of service, he was witnessing the slow breakdown of Debbil Sound Products. He now said to Siv, "Of course of course, Ranjan Sir explained it all to me. Please don't feel bad. This is part of life, so I will survive."Siv: Varmaji, you walk around the office a lot. What is the mood out there like?Varmaji: I think this time we panicked. We could have handled the matter differently. I think you have to communicate in such a way that even if people have to leave, they should go peacefully. But, right now, there is reaction out there. They are all young, you see. But you are wiser." He stopped here, fearing he had crossed his boundaries.Bali urged him to go on. Continuing in a lower tone, Varmaji said, "See, you too must have gone through crises and learnt that it is not the end of the world or your life. If at all, it made you stronger and smarter. Those days were different, survival was the way of life, we didn't have all these salaries and supermarkets and what not. Today, these young people get nervous because their whole lives are sitting on a series of EMIs. They do not want to go back to their parents and say, ‘Aata kaay karoo?' They need to know that there is life after a lay-off... Don't let them go with confused memories and thoughts, that is all."A heavy silence followed. Varmaji spoke again: "Siv Sir, may I make a request? I have no family wealth to fall back on, I have just enrolled my oldest son in design school and taken a huge loan. Can't I just work at half the salary for sometime, until I find another job? Sir, I have been doing some thinking. Suppose you keep me on a retainer for 10 months at least. That way you don't have to pay me PF, LTA, etc."In these 12 months, I would like to work in the business side and Jennifer can work on personal… Is this OK? This will make my CV look better. Besides, Jennifer too needs to know how the personal side works, as she will be handling both portfolios, no?"When Varmaji left, Siv said, "He is so right about communication! I don't know how this cascade of rumours took over. But really, we must even now send out a sensible communication, to reduce the impact. The communication must validate the loss. For example, business heads must say ‘we have been thinking for a long time about this, it has been a hard decision to make, etc."Gopi: I agree. ‘Change is sudden, change is painful, change is choiceless, times are bad…' — we are repeating ourselves… as business heads we need to talk about the reason for change. We need to endorse the employees' sense of loss, recognise their pain.CFO: A lot of indirect informal communication has already gone out. Now what can you do trying and doctoring words? Instead of communicating this to the person who is going to be hit, you have made this known to others who may not be directly impacted. That has led to rumour mongering and trauma!Suryaveer Pant, behavioural strategist: I wish we had foreseen that this informal communication was going to add to the sense of impending doom. This one indiscretion in admin is going to have the entire middle management fretting! Yet, I have heard 5-6 different reactions to the same news! How strange man is! One chap was very angry and said he would sue the company! Another was very sad and bargained for time. Yet, I have also heard about a third fellow who is planning a nice holiday.And here is Varmaji who bargained so well! We are so different as people. Siv: I too was wondering this morning. I was of a similar view that some people are different and have a way with dealing with crises. The reactions are different not because we are different, but because of the way we interact with the information that comes to us and when it comes to us and, most importantly, from whom it comes to us. After all, as an organisation can we sift people according to types? People are not of four or six kinds. But, in fact, there are as many kinds as there are people. The important thing is processes. That is why organisation processes are deemed good when they can unify more people successfully.Bali: Yet see Varmaji. No doubt I communicated to him directly. And that may have helped, because of close proximity. But it also brought about a better attitude to facing the crisis and change. I think that made it possible for Varma to think calmly and not as a victim, and even find amazing solutions! Yet I wonder how the whisper campaign began, we did not initiate it… can we try to save the situation even now?Classroom/syndicate discussionDo acts of management determine the environment that plays out in a company? casestudymeera at gmail dot com var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') }
Read More
In the legal framework, the questions will be: what does the law say, what happened, and who is more likely to win the legal argument. I am not a lawyer but even to a lay person like me it is clear that Kabir has not fulfiled the terms of the tenancy contract and, therefore, he is liable to lose the house deposit at the very least and get mired in prolonged litigation as a result of the omissions he made. I do not think his organisation, Gyrett India, has any legal responsibility unless it is seen as Kabir's guarantor in this transaction. Everyone is unnecessarily getting hot under the collar as far as the organisation's role in the matter is concerned. I will not dwell on the legal framework further as I do not know much about the law.The second framework is the humanistic framework. The questions there would be regarding what should determine our actions. The contract or empathy with the human distress of a single mother who has been wronged by her husband? The answer to these questions will be determined by further questions that need to be asked. "Whose agent am I? Am I the agent of my values which require me to be gender sensitive? Am I the agent of the woman in question? Or, above all, am I the agent of my organisation?" Based on these answers, one could debate whether the CEO was right in taking a stand in favour of a woman who is presumably distressed and has presumably trespassed on a property, whom he has never met and who has no sympathy for the cause of his organisation. However, in the end, he is in this situation precisely because he is the CEO of an organisation and therefore, its agent. In the ultimate analysis, he will be required to do what is right for the organisation. The common sense approach to the matter would show that the CEO's willingness to get the company involved in an situation that is obviously messy without completely assessing it, is a management style that is difficult to support. The third framework is the sociological framework. When I look at this situation as a window into the society of which I am a part, I realise this is a story about how we all have been forced to become paranoid and distrusting. This is a story of mistrust prevalent in our society. We do not trust people we love or used to love; we don't trust people we work with or have contractual relationships with; we do not trust institutions in our society, especially those that enforce the law. And when someone like Kabir trusts, we are shocked and appalled at his naivety. I can almost hear the sniggers in the corridors — "An MBA and capable of trusting! What did they teach you at the management school, Kabir? You think you can get away with trusting. Let this be a lesson for you — trust, and people will exploit you." Moreover, I am worried that I would have said the same things to Kabir. I am worried that I would not have been able to say to him, "It is all right, it is not your fault. You trusted, and so what if someone betrayed your trust? Do not worry, we live in a civil society and we have ways of addressing this." I would not have been able to say, "Kabir, it is all right that you trusted. It is good to trust. Do not stop trusting just because of this incident. We need people to trust each other if we have to live in a society that works and looks after everyone." I would not have been able to say any of these things to him because, unfortunately, we live in a society that transacts on the basis of mistrust and each transaction provides us further evidence of the need to protect ourselves. Can we continue to breathe in such a paranoid society? To me, trust is the very essence of being human. I cannot let the fear of lawlessness terrorise me into becoming a mistrusting person. I trust, therefore, I am. I know there is lawlessness. I know people will test my need and will to trust. I know I will get hurt. But I prefer to be hurt a few times than not trust for a lifetime. I will survive by saying to myself that most people are worth trusting, some people are imperfect. I cannot live my life by the rules that some people make. I will live by my own rules. Trust is an important human rule. I trust people I love, those I work with, those who look after me, those who make the laws and those who protect them. Sometimes their greed gets the better of them. But, I can live with that. I cannot live within a trust-less vacuum.Kabir, you will lose the Rs 5 lakh and have many a sleepless nights. But please do not stop trusting people. It may seem Gandhian or foolish to most, but a society that stops trusting is a jungle. I fear jungles, don't you?Dr Achal Bhagat is a consultant psychiatrist and psychotherapist at Apollo Hospital, Delhi. He is also the founder director of Saarthak, a mental health NGO var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 28-12-2009)
Read More
Gyrett India's practice to help employees by providing loans for security deposits for tenanted premises, is a common practice and, in a country where accommodation is becoming dearer by the day, very laudable. However, an organisation must also ensure that its own interests are taken care of. Sadly enough, where many organisations and most people err is that they ‘pay attention' only when the problem has arisen.It was important for Kabir to take all necessary steps to terminate the lease in a proper manner — by way of written communication — and preserve a written record of any statement made by his landlord, Kohli, with respect to non-repayment of the security deposit. In the absence of these, both Kohli and Gyrett can, in fact, initiate legal action against Kabir for damage to the flat and refund of the security deposit, respectively. In fact, there being no privity of contract between Gyrett and Kohli, the only way for the company to recover its money would be from Kabir.What Should Have Been Done? Kabir ought to have written to Kohli (letter or e-mail) stating clearly that he wished early termination of the lease. Given Kohli's stance that he was not in a position to refund the security deposit, Kabir should have called him to the flat, shown him that the flat had been vacated and was in the same condition as when the lease had commenced. Thereafter, Kabir should have handed over notional possession to Kohli and told him that the keys to the premises would be handed over simultaneous to the refund of the security deposit to Gyrett. All this could have been recorded in a one-page letter signed by both Kabir and Kohli.Subsequently, having found out about Mrs Kohli's unauthorised entry into the premises, Gyrett or Kabir should also have again immediately written to Kohli stating the facts and recording the situation from the time of first offer of vacation till present and reiterating the date of vacation of the flat. Once again, notional possession should have been offered to Kohli (if not already handed over), with the actual physical possession and the keys to be delivered upon refund of the security deposit. What Gyrett should not do is play mediator between the estranged couple. This is neither their responsibility nor their area of expertise.What If None Of This Has Been Done? Kabir has the option of filing a civil suit against Kohli for recovery of the security deposit. In these proceedings, the keys of the premises can be handed over before the court. In the suit, Kabir would have to establish leading suitable evidence that any/all damage to the premises happened after he vacated the premises and that he is not liable for the same. Gyrett can support Kabir in these proceedings.It is correct that the law is codified and available at the press of a few buttons. Companies and their employees also have the advantage of both in-house and external specialised legal assistance. If Kabir had only thought to take Avijit's advice before taking steps to vacate the flat, the whole situation could have been more favourable for Gyrett. But this will only happen if there is a culture prevalent in an organisation that legal assistance has to be taken not only to get you out of a soup, but to prevent you getting into a soup in the first place.And What About The Mrs Kohli? We must remember that the ex-Mrs Kohli has herself broken the law. She had the option available to seek recourse against Kohli by approaching the family court or invoking a court-supervised mediation. But she has chosen to ignore all those options. In the present case, CEO Rai's view is based on a story told by the lady, the veracity of which he is not in a position to evaluate. Although his view may appear humanitarian, it is in effect perpetuating an illegality, which in the long run can only be disadvantageous to all concerned. Would it not, therefore, be more advisable to initiate legal action against Mrs Kohli and to first protect the company's interests? The law cannot always guarantee a win-win situation. This is not because the law is lacking; rather it is because certain individuals are found wanting.The law and its enforcement are not an anathema to how we would like to conduct ourselves as ‘moral' people. However, often enough, things come to such a pass and we face such dilemmas because of the our carelessness in conducting our affairs and because we implicitly or explicitly help perpetuate the weaknesses or flaws in the system. The moment we stop doing this we will find that law enforcement works in our favour, as it is supposed to, and not against us.Ananya Kumar is a senior associate at JSA, Advocates & Solicitors. The views expressed here are his own var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 28-12-2009)
Read More
Kabir Sarathy was completely baffled. He had just seen a ghost. Standing outside Copper Dome Apartments, he hailed an autorickshaw, as his knees threatened to fold up. Copper Dome was where Kabir had lived for the past three years. A month ago, he was asked by his employers Gyrett India to move to Hyderabad as the Regional Head. So he called his landlord Pancham Kohli and told him so, adding, "Let us complete the formalities by 25th." Kohli had agreed. As the 25th drew near, Kabir called Kohli for the refund of the Rs 5 lakh deposit but Kohli kept buying time. Finally, on the 24th evening, he told Kabir, "Recession has really done me in. I don't have the money yet, but give me a few weeks; I will somehow manage, I promise."Preparatory to his departure, Kabir explained the situation to Victor, in admin, handing him the apartment keys for later exchange with the cheque. Gyrett India gave employees a house rent allowance and it was up to them to find a residence within that allowance. Gyrett paid the tenancy deposit and it was agreed that at the time of vacation of the leased premises, the employee would refund the deposit. In effect, the security deposit was treated as an interest-free loan from the employer to the employee. These were the terms on which Gyrett had loaned the amount to Kabir too. Back at the hotel and feeling stronger, Kabir called Avijit Das, Gyrett's legal head. "I am a little hassled, Avijit, please let me explain," he began. "Two weeks ago, I vacated the apartment at 3A Copper Dome and the landlord was to refund the deposit money. But three days ago he called me and said his financial situation was tough and asked for time. So I handed the keys to Victor and told him that he should take care since I have to leave."Yesterday, when I was packing up at the hotel I recalled I had left my electric kettle in the kitchen of the flat. So I took the keys from Victor and went to the flat. But the key would not work. I rang the doorbell thinking the landlord has already moved in. But to my horror I saw a lady at the door who told me she was the landlord's estranged wife!"I then recalled Mr Kohli telling me that his ex-wife has the fourth bedroom of the apartment and it had been suitably walled out, and she had her own separate door with lock etc. It now transpires that she has broken the wall and taken over the house! Avijit, I am very concerned; please let me know what I need to do. Frankly, I don't want any trouble." Avijit heard him out and said, "Okay, first, cancel your ticket to Hyderabad, stay back a week, till we get some direction. Come by to my room at 3 p.m., I should be free by then." Avijit then went to admin and asked for a copy of Kabir's lease agreement and studied it. When Kabir met him at 3 p.m., Avijit said, "Tricky spot to be in, my friend… I hope you understand that the deposit that was paid by the company is in fact an interest-free loan from employer to employee and you will be required to refund it to the company… hmm? "Anyway, first things first. Write to the landlord immediately apprising him of the situation with full details of when you vacated the apartment and all subsequent events. You need to be aware and alert to one fact: notwithstanding your informing the landlord, etc., your liability to refund the security deposit to Gyrett in full, is in no way diminished. I am going to do my best to help your personal situation, but the company's onus is nil in this situation." Kabir nodded and said, "That is why I called you, Avijit. I was completely taken aback by what has happened." Avijit: So tell me, on the date of vacation of the leased premises, did you communicate in writing to the landlord that you have vacated the premises and that simultaneous to the refund of the security deposit, the keys can be collected by the landlord from Gyrett's admin, who you have authorised to deal with this matter instead? Kabir: Why, why do you say that? I called Kohli and then yesterday I sent him an email.Avijit: It's like this. The moment you enter into an agreement for anything, every transaction after that with the other party comes under the governance of the contract, my friend. Tenancy is a legal relationship. Your exit must be formally communicated. What if Kohli says you did not tell him that you were vacating? What if there was a fire and there was damage to his furniture? How do you prove that you had vacated the property and that you were not responsible for the fire? Besides, Kabir, the agreement includes Rs 5 lakh that belong to Gyrett, correct? You needed to be careful. You have a written agreement, isn't it? Then a written lease would not ordinarily be terminated by a phone call.Kabir: Avijit, how can the landlord not ‘accept' a verbal communication as communication? How will he use it against me? Kohli's wife has broken the wall and moved in and occupied the place, illegally! And where was the need for written communication? I called him and he said he would give me the deposit etc. But in two days retracted that saying he was strapped for funds. I told him I was leaving on 30th and he promised to do something. When he had not come till 25th night, I sent him an email and told him he can contact Victor. var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } Avijit: And what did Mrs Kohli tell you when you met her at the door? Kabir: She introduced herself as the ex-Mrs Kohli. She said divorce proceedings were on and her husband had left her with nothing. She said, "Don't believe his sob stories. He has more money than is good for him. I have a child to raise. He has declared himself close to bankruptcy and so alimony is poor. He has three other flats and two horses and says he has nothing. This was the only way out, I had no choice". After Kabir had left, Avijit met the CEO, Prithvi Rai, to apprise him of the situation and also so that Kabir could delay his departure. He ended with, "We are, therefore, in a nice soup. Here is a lady who has taken over the apartment claiming that her alimony does not even buy fish feed. Kabir is, of course, stunned by the developments. He had verbally communicated his departure to the landlord, and later added an email. "If the matter goes to court, the landlord can claim that he was not properly intimated that the property has been vacated, and any damage caused to the premises till actual handing over of possession is Kabir's responsibility. If he sticks to that and can prove it, then there is no saying what can ensue. CEO Rai: What do you suggest we do? Should not Kabir and you go and meet Mrs Kohli and find out what is going on? Maybe impress upon her that she will bring many people to grief? Avijit: I would advise against that Prithvi. Rather than going myself to meet her, I would first write to the landlord and tell him of the situation and thereafter request him to meet me at the flat or accompany me to the flat so that we can discuss further steps. I would follow this up with a call. It would not be advisable for Gyrett to get involved playing mediator between the estranged couple. Accordingly Avijit called Kohli and said, "I am calling on behalf of our employee Kabir Sarathy. We need to know when you can return the deposit of 3A Copper Dome…" Kohli didn't wait for the rest of the sentence for he had begun talking: "Arre sahib, main to doob chuka hoon! Three of my businesses have been shut down, I eat once a day... please return my flat soon so I can sell it and use the money for my treatment." Avijit repeated, "I understand a deposit has been given to you..." Kohli said, "But did you return the flat? Where is the flat? Some strange lady lives there now..." Avijit knew the game Kohli was playing. He said, "The lady told us she was your wife, Mr Kohli. So effectively the flat has been ‘taken' by you before we could give it to you! In any case, why don't we meet at 3A Copper Dome? You can bring the deposit and I will bring the keys which you won't need anymore but it is a technicality, ha-ha." When he had folded shut his mobile phone, he noticed the CFO, Amrutham Vasan, in the room, standing with his hands on his hips. Standing a little away was Kabir. Vasan said, "See Avijit, I would not shilly shally with all this elegant talk. Since we are technically in possession of the property, we have the choice of moving the court against the illegal occupant, the lady, and begin that process with a police complaint... I don't know why you are dithering." Rai was shocked. He would not hear of filing a police complaint against the lady. "Arre, you know how the law works sometimes. Haven't we heard enough of how women can be manhandled and abused if this goes the criminal route? I am not having any of that. Besides, she has a young child… we must be a little sensitive!" Avijit spoke in his characteristic monotone: "The matter is simple Prithvi. The most important thing is to hand over possession of the property to Mr Kohli. At least, in this way any future action will have to be taken by him. CEO: How do you mean? How can we hand over possession when it has passed from our hands anyway? If you mean give the keys to Kohli, then there is the business of the Rs 5 lakh too. So, what are you saying Avijit? Oh yes, even the keys are pointless now as a trump card, since she has changed the lock, good lord! Isn't there any other way of approaching this? CFO Vasan (very unhappy with this): That is Rs 5 lakh, what we pay every year as rent for 2 sq. ft. We cannot afford to get emotional. They are taking us for a ride probably. What have we got to do with all this? The matter is simple, no? Take the house, give me my deposit. Kabir: It is not so simple, na Amrutham? The wife has moved in. Vasan: Then what am I saying? File a police complaint to simply ask for your rented apartment back. You are not doing anything more! Kabir: How yaar? I vacated it no! Even my kettle is not there. Vasan: Arre you sales and marketing types, I say! What I am saying is lodge a complaint... We don't have time for all this nonsense. I don't understand all this wishy washy conflicts in your head. I think, next time round we have to make it clear that the deposit is a loan to the employee and how he repays it is his problem. Avijit: This is about much more than the loan, Amrutham. Even if Kabir returns the Rs 5 lakh from a lottery gain, Mr Kohli can sue us. If the matter goes to court, the landlord can say there was no formal notice of vacation of the premises and any damage caused to the premises till actual handing over is Kabir's responsibility. Vasan: Then cut a long story short. This is Kabir's headache. I don't see any context for us as an organisation to get involved. Avijit continued being poker faced and quiet and rocked his left foot up and down. CEO: So Rs 5 lakh is the price we pay to save a lady from harassment and a law that is unfair? So be it. Please expense it out as ‘Repairs to damage caused to the property'. Finish it off. Kabir: Fantastic. Who wins here? The landlord does not get his flat; we don't get the deposit back; I don't ever get a loan for a house; the lady does not even have a legal hold on the house. All we are doing is… I don't know! I feel terrible. var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } Vasan: And you had better feel worse. You won't sell a bottle of hair oil to a dealer without him signing an invoice, but you walked out of an asset without a written communication? You know how our law is. In India, you don't need to study law; just living here is enough to get you a Master's degree! Tell me Prithvi, why do you think the lady will be harassed? In fact, if anything, she is the one causing the harassment! Then again, what does the CEO have to do with the law of the land? How can he use shareholder money to justify a feeble assumption of the law and shirk responsibility? Don't get me wrong… CEO Rai: I am not disturbed by your observations, Vasan, I have dealt with the law any number of times and seen it demolish the best of people. The person here is a lady, a single mother who has not much to depend on. Her husband has treated her shabbily... which is all fine. But now to file a criminal complaint will mean she will be called to the police station... and the entire thing can be harrowing... I feel for her child. Cops can misbehave with her. I am not pulling these things out of my head. Messy things happen and finally it is Rs 5 lakh. Please think again about this for a day and let us see if we have any new thoughts tomorrow. Outside, as they were walking to their rooms, Vasan was fretting, and told Avijit: "I guess then he just foregoes the Rs 5 lakh; writes it off as a bad debt and moves on. When a person has such a rigid emotional bent, logic cannot guide him. And who can tell where emotions can lead? He must consider a life with a charity! "I wonder how Rai would treat this if he were not a CEO but a junior technical assistant in a mobile company and that five lakh was his own money that was stuck and he had a sudden payment to make on house repairs and the rains were coming and he had a two-year-old child who would not be able to survive the monsoon flooding in his single-bedroom home. Would he look at the woman and say, ‘Jaane do...'?" Avijit: I am only continuing the argument —this is not a reflection of my views. To answer your question, I guess that is the difference you evolve into as a mindset, when you grow in stature and wealth... where your compassion levels are far higher and you would rather not risk a lady's life or izzat, than get Rs 5 lakh back. Vasan: You can evolve in stature, and that's great. But you must first do what you are here to do: protect the interest of the company and its shareholders. Duty dictates you get back the money using the law. As a genuinely concerned evolved-in-stature CEO, he can make a personal donation to the lady and get back the money for the company. That would be more logical and in keeping with personal evolution — than to force the company to take the path of your personal evolution. Kabir: Very well, then you tell us — given what we know of the law here, the delays in delivering justice, the innumerable episodes of abuse and mishandling of women, that Rai is anxious to ensure that the lady's life is not rendered more complex than it already is, that we are an organisation and, hence, we must be ultra stiff upper lipped, not feeling, emoting humans, do tell me what is the course of action available to us? Vasan: You stepped into business knowing the laws of India and that justice takes time to deliver. Does that mean you will not follow the laws of the land? I'd say step down as CEO before it hurts the organisation. Personal motive should remain distinct from professional calls. Would you use your personal judgement and motives to handle professional situations — say a promotion was not given to someone who you thought deserved it because his mother was hospitalised and needed money? And, if you won't insist on this promotion, why would you insist on protecting a woman you don't know, from a future of harassment that is yet in the realm of conjecture? She may be harassed, but there is nothing to say this is certain. Avijit: Therefore, you are saying that while his sentiments are noble, they breakdown in the face of duty. I do think we must stay within the law, work through the law, stand by the law and empower it. It may seem at times that the law is weak and ineffective. But, in fact, it is the people who wield the law, who are ineffective and unwilling... and that includes people who are victims too...yes? Vasan: Listen, it is people who provide excuses for not upholding the law and who use it selectively based on their convenience who hurt the system the most. Noble sentiments have their place. But duty comes before everything — even if it appears to be the wrong thing to do. Next day, Rai said, "We can talk law if we have followed the rule book too. While we have not broken any law, we are now standing on the wrong side of it simply in that Kabir failed to communicate to the landlord the date of his vacating the flat. As a result, if you pay attention, the landlord was unable to take reasonable care to ensure his flat was not encroached upon by his estranged wife. It is my feeling that had he known he would have protected his property. So now, standing as we are on the uncomfortable side of the law, what steps can we take to ensure that this does not cause the lady too much grief, I mean as an organisation which is filing a complaint against her. The difference is clear: she is an individual with no front to hide behind. We are an organisation and can hide behind the Companies Act, our stakeholder duty, our corporate status and whatnot and pretend we are not human but an ‘other entity'. The law is codified. I can Google it and get the entire law on my screen. What is not codified is our intelligence and feelings. I want us to have a human face while dealing with this. Please understand, if the law was always fair and prompt, the common man would not be fighting another's battle. Why, people would not be depriving others of their rights. I value your observations 100 per cent and am even proud that you are able to tell me where I get off, but not yet. "Show me we have a human face; come up with a solution that is not just leaning on the law. Give me a win-win solution…" Classroom/Syndicate discussion If the law is an enabler, why are its corridors suffocating, perilous and user unfriendly? casestudymeera at gmail dot com var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') }
Read More
Internet is a space where a wide range of things can be done. Apart from the conventional use of the space for selling, one cannot but be amazed at the way cyberworld can be used to state and generate opinions. This is something that Reshaad, the youngest E-sqd team member, is alluding to when he says, "On the Net, you have a million people dying to be heard, to be seen, to express, to shout". Facebook and Twitter, among others, are the spaces that are the containers for the thousand indeed millions of voices that have suddenly been given a platform for expression. No more are you shouting into a void, but into one or many receivers who respond and include many others as well, much like the concentric waves that form when you throw a pebble into a pond.Some of the social platforms created on the Net seem to cater to a basic need that people have: connecting with others. When you delve a little deeper into the form of that connecting, you notice that people search primarily for those similar to themselves. Resonance happens. You hear the proverbial splash when the pebble is dropped in the well. You can say the tiniest thing and there is a response, something that the non-Net world just doesn't provide. The circle expands phenomenally. Not only can you relate across a huge spectrum of people, you can express yourself far more freely. The notion of crowd has been redefined in a major way. No more is it about physical assembly or presence of a large number of people. Internet has spawned the possibility of large-scale collective behaviour on a platform other than physical presence. An initiating behaviour can become the basis for a large number of views binding together, much like the Mexican wave at a football match. The difference with the actual presence of people is that the medium is the written word as against physical proximity and intense emotion. Writing itself transforms the emotion, instilling a certain formality on the process. There is some thought that goes into each response.So how does all this apply to E-sqd? Lopa and her boss Dwij Nanda look at the issue of catering to an online audience in a way that sees the Net only in terms of whether it can be used as an effective platform to sell. Lopa says it is not worthwhile to invest in an online sales module. Nanda refers to the three-dimensionality of the actual experience as opposed to the two-dimensionality of online shopping. Nanda does see how the opinions become "foaming froth", but his view is that it is not worthwhile to engage with this kind of thing.If you look closely at the instance of Motrin referred to, you will see that the starting point, before the build up, was that the manner of writing about mothers was disparaging. It seemed like a legitimate enough reason to voice the unhappiness. When this kind of thing escalates, there is a pressure on those who (intentionally or otherwise) may have chosen their words poorly. One needs to distinguish those triggers that have substance from those that are purely rabble-rousing without a basis in fact. All collective behaviour cannot be dismissed as ‘froth'. Consumers want to express themselves and especially to other likeminded people. They communicate experiences with each other, which was earlier so limited.The reference to the poll on whether Shashi Tharoor's use of ‘cattle class' was offensive is very intriguing. My suspicion is that if the people who are being referred to were in fact internet savvy, their reaction may have been strongly negative (similar to the mothers who were offended by the Motrin advertisement). The fact is that in India, internet is only for the privileged. In countries where the penetration is far deeper, more people share their upsets. among other things.The lesson for me is that one cannot simply dismiss all that snowballs on the internet as unworthy of attention. There are several issues that have shown how effective this process of seeding an idea and its support is to redress or draw the attention of people to what is wrong. Some examples include support for H.S. Sabharwal, a professor at Madhav College, who was killed by political hooligans in Ujjain or the protest against the way that women at a pub in Mangalore were beaten by self-proclaimed upholders of the perceived collective social code.It is clearly a new world that is in the process of taking a shape. Suddenly, the connected laptop in front of you is like a large group of people who can validate or question or extend your thinking. There are both negative and positive forces at work. One must be open enough to receive both and yet know the difference.Those at E-sqd must realise that it is not about having separate managers for Twitter or Facebook, but about being collectively aware of what is transpiring as well as using the internet with responsible purpose.Kaushik Gopal is a psychologist who focuses on people issues in organisations with the intention of development var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 14-12-2009)
Read More
This case in not about social networking and Twitter. It is about the fundamental issues involved in building an ever-changing brand (elegant living and lifestyle through clothing and accessories) in this era of new media choices — addressing issues such as the brand's DNA, positioning, quotient of modernity and approach to proactive customer-centricity — and dealing with the dictates of cyberspace is the inevitable path to building a strong brand. Kailash was dismayed that E-sqd never sold online, but Lopa remains in denial, and later equates the internet with social networking sites. The E-sqd team gets into a ‘To Twitter or not to Twitter' debate, losing sight of Kailash's real point. Prima facie, the discussion seems anti-Twitter and anti-Net. But as they grapple with this new beast from the digital era, they realise the beast cannot be wished away. During the debate, their stances change.Lopa sticks to her view that the universe of online consumers is too small to be bothered with. But her last comment is: "I would have started a dialogue with those moms…". CEO Dwij Nanda starts off rubbishing the online world but asks searching questions. Nayana firmly believes in large-sample based market research and is against attaching any significance to what a few thousand bloggers or Twitter folk say. And yet she uses the Tharoor example. Sankalp, unsure of his arguments, starts off seeing the point but soon begins to focus on the cons, without even addressing the pros of social media.Unsurprisingly, Reshaad, the youngest of the team, based on personal experience, tries hard to get them to see the big opportunity that social networking creates. He is pushing the group to pay heed to the new world of bloggers and tweeters whom he likens to a group that may be small but holds the mike and is, therefore, listened to by many others. As Kailash says, online presence is not just about sales. Staying open, available and visible to the consumer, ensures that more about your brand gets perceived. The brand needs to be known globally, and needs to follow the global Indian customer, wherever he goes. Cyberspace and its role may be new, but the basic principles guiding human and consumer behaviour remain the same. Forward thinking and imaginative brands have addressed such questions, even before the advent of social networking sites, by being clear about what the brand stands for. In fact, the iconic status of brands is a direct manifestation of their consistent adherence to well-chiselled truths and consumer realities.Just as in real life, so also in marketing, no consumer messes around with clear-headed, communicative and confident brands.The internet may be omnipresent, but it will always be your real target audience that will consistently respond based on experience. Very few people have original views on Facebook or Twitter. But often, the lead view is based on experience. While this happens everywhere, on social media it gets captured real fast and all in one place. And here lies the opportunity for brands to proactively seed positive stories and brand strengths. The analogy of throwing your brand to the mob as it were, happens when the brand communication programme is reactive and, hence, out of control. Not otherwise.The Fortune magazine (11 March 2009) has some revealing information about Facebook. Television took 38 years to reach 150 million users or units sold, cell phone took 14 years and Facebook, five years. Fifteen million users update their status daily. Users in the age group of 18-24 years account for less than 25 per cent of Facebook users. Fastest-growing demographic on Facebook? Women 55 years and older.So it is not true that pre-teens and teens are the only ones on these sites. Equally, it is important to appreciate that in an era of co-creation and conversations, what the early-adopter young ones say holds sway over the rest. Therefore, there is no basis to ignore them or rubbish them as gossip-mongers. Two learnings from behavioural economics as enunciated by brand guru Rory Sutherland are worth noting. One, the power of now, whereby we tend to respond to stimulus in proportion to its immediacy and not its strength. Two, the power of channel preference. For example, while young people typically do not give much to charity, if you allow them to give via text messaging they can become quite generous. Finally, when you are in the game, you have to get comfortable with handling negative feedback too. For one, it pushes you into introspection, which is good for staying on track. Two, it allows you to re-articulate your brand promise more effectively. Brands must emulate good teachers who answer every question, with wisdom, tact and maturity.Umesh Shrikhande is CEO of Contract Advertising and has been engaged with the process of building brands for over 20 years now var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 14-12-2009)
Read More
The Motrin case is a popular case study of how a brand took a beating on social media. There are several similar morality tale-style case studies that argue that "unless the brand is present on social media" it will not be able to respond to negative rumours and consumer backlashes, or worse, get brandjacked by profile squatters or spoof artists. Such doomsday scenarios often attract the attention of senior executives and dominate conference room conversations about social media. These conversations inevitably involve conflicting points of view, as executives and managers have different comfort levels with social platforms in their personal avatars, and may lead to one of these five possible scenarios. 1. Sometimes, these horror stories scare away executives from social media, as they associate social media with morchas and mob mentality. 2. Sometimes, executives correctly decide that such scenarios are an exception rather than the rule, and creating an elaborate social media presence as a form of insurance isn't really an attractive proposition.3. Some recognise the value of listening to social media conversations and start a listening programme, but are disappointed when they realise that no one is really talking about them. 4. Some executives mandate a corporate Twitter account, or Facebook page, and realise that engaging people takes time and, sometimes, a dedicated resource. 5. Still other managers decide to dip their toes in social media themselves and create a Twitter profile, or perhaps even a personal blog. In all these scenarios, executives are disappointed with the results in the first three months — 200-odd followers on Twitter, 125 fans on Facebook, 22 or so subscribers on the blog — and decide that Twitter and Facebook are peripheral to their business, perhaps even a distraction. Often, they are right. The problem is not with the social platforms themselves. Twitter, SMSGupShup, Facebook, Orkut, Flickr and YouTube are all powerful platforms that have enabled new forms of social behaviour and unleashed unparalleled creativity among their users. The problem is with the excessive focus on the platform of the year. These social platforms are transient, the underlying value system is important, which can be summarised in the form of five archetypes, or the Five Cs of social media.Consumer Generated Content: Your consumers are authors, photographers and filmmakers, all rolled into one. Tap into their creativity and ask them to interpret your brand.Conversations: Your customers, partners and employees are talking about you, in public. Listen to them, reach out to them and engage them in a two-way conversation.Collaboration: People work together in flow when they connect with each other as people. Create rich profiles and shared workspaces to enable people to help each other.Community: Communities come together around a shared social object — a lifestyle, cause or passion. Build and nurture a platform to host these conversations and become associated with an idea that is bigger than your brand.Collective Intelligence: Customers, employees and partners can give you new ideas and insights. Ask for their ideas, help them build on these ideas, recognise and reward them for their contribution.So, Lopa should start by asking how can these five underlying dynamics help E-sqd achieve its business objective of becoming a world-class lifestyle retail chain? Can we seek insights from our customers on what Easy Elegance means to them? Can we identify E-sqd evangelists and ask them to share stories about items they found at the store and the reactions these items elicited from family and friends? Can we integrate the customer community with our loyalty programme? Can we ask our store employees to share stories on how they handled a particularly difficult customer or went out of their way to help a regular customer? Can we collect stories from the internet on what Indians are saying about fashion, style and design, and showcase them on this community platform?If Lopa looks beyond Twitter and asks herself these questions, she will realise that E-sqd can do so much with social media and that it is easy to start. Also, if her CEO Dwij Nanda asks if the internet user base in India is significant enough, Lopa can tell him that India's 40 million active internet users are not only young, urban and upwardly mobile, but also heavy users of social networking and blogging platforms. Add to that India's 400 million mobile subscribers, of which 20 million use group SMSing services and 20 million use mobile internet. The base is big enough to be interesting to most Indian marketers, certainly a high-end lifestyle retail chain such as E-sqd.Gaurav Mishra (gauravonomics.com) helps Indian and international brands build and nurture online communities as CEO of business consultancy 2020 Social (2020social.com) var intro = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#commenth4').text()) var page = jQuery.trim(jQuery('#storyPage').text()) if (page.indexOf(intro) < 0) { jQuery('#commenth4').attr('style', 'display:block;') } (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 14-12-2009)
Read More
