Sharan Ranganathan looked at the State Forum's order: "District forum judgement is correct and no deficiency in service from the Bank's side." So there he was, back in the dog house without a bone to chew. Only a few days ago, the District Forum, too, had smashed his petition. Sharan was an ordinary professional, led an ordinary life, did ordinary stuff, and thought ordinary thoughts. His life revolved around his mother, wife, daughter and employer. He was also a secretary of the society for clean roads in Komley Nagar. Every Saturday, he took a round of the streets, told the teams what needed to improve, then came home to a hearty tiffin of upma and peaberry coffee. At 6 pm, he drove the three women of his family to the local Balaji temple, where they sat in contemplation for 30 minutes while his little daughter ran about making a terrific racket with her anklets and ‘vande mataram' sung in soprano, the only song she knew, learnt at play school. One day Sharan did the most extraordinary act. He hired a lawyer. For the Ranganathan family, it was a serious move, but they were clear that they had done right. His mother Gomati looked at him through bleary eyes and gasped, "Lawyer-ah?" When Sharan explained to her his helplessness, she said, "Words like ‘police', ‘vakeel', were not even spoken in our house. We minded our own business and lived our small lives. Your father would have been proud of you. Go, get that lawyer. We will see!"This is what happened. Sharan lived with his family in a rented apartment. Now that the little one was growing up, he decided it was time to buy his own place. He earned well, was an associate VP, would be able to commit to an EMI... and so it was that he scouted around and found a decent apartment in Horizon View, a rather good property developed by Gem Builders.Next, Sharan submitted an application for a housing loan to a bank on 31 January. It was a poignant moment as he sat with the bank manager below a very poor print of the Father of the Nation. Partha Dharma, the bank manager, drummed his fingers at the foot of Sharan's application... Presently, he placed another form before Sharan. "You will have to first buy Ulip worth Rs 30,000," he said. Sharan was surprised. "Eh? Why?" he asked. Dharma laughed a tinkling laugh, "Bank has to achieve targets, no? To serve you! So each home loan applicant has to take this Ulip. Their agent is sitting there by the water cooler. Fill the form, hand over the cheque, and bring the receipt to me." Sharan felt the beginnings of an unhappy feeling inside. This was undue coercion and an unfair trade practice. He disliked dishonesty. He hated it when he was unable to protest. So he grappled with his soul and paid for the Ulip. Next came the need to have the new property at 9B Horizon View surveyed by the bank. The bank manager said, "But you will have to pay the conveyance charges. If not, it cannot be done." The tinkling laughter had gone.Sharan looked at the man, his brass designation plate, numerous gold rings, perfectly trimmed moustache... With a withering look towards the Mahatma in the frame above, Sharan submitted to coercion, and handed over a copy of the sale deed. Nine days later, on 9 February, at 8.10 pm, the loan for Rs 18 lakh was sanctioned, which he would repay in 240 months at an interest of 9.25 per cent. Sharan was relieved. He circled 9 February on his calendar and offered sincere prayers at the Balaji temple. The next morning, Sharan went to the bank's lawyer's office to collect the draft of the sale deed. The lawyer, looking at the papers, told Sharan, "The following changes must be made to this sale deed. One, the original buyer James Joyce's name must appear on the first page of the sale deed. Two, the car park with the apartment must be on the deed, and, three, the sale deed should be not for Rs 7 lakh + Rs 29 lakh — which no doubt is the consideration paid by Joyce to Gem — but the guideline value on which the stamp duty has been assessed, that is, of Rs 21 lakh, must replace the amounts on the sale deed.".So a war had begun between the main bank and its branch. The main bank wanted the builder to add more clauses, which he refused to do. So although the branch had sanctioned the loan, by morning, when Sharan went to the bank to take the sale deed, the bank lawyer had pulled the rug.break-page-breakNow to get a fix on the variety of numbers in this transaction: Apartment 9B had been a direct purchase by James Joyce as a first sale from the builder Gem. James had paid Gem Rs 7 lakh under a sale deed for the undivided land; and Rs 29 lakh under a construction agreement; that is, Rs 36 lakh in all. Both documents — sale deed and construction agreement — were attached to Sharan's loan application. James was now selling the apartment to Sharan for Rs 45 lakh. Since he was selling so soon after initially buying it, James had not registered the apartment in his name, but he had paid the transfer charges to Gem Builders. Under law, the flat would need to be registered at a value called ‘guideline value', on which he would need to pay the stamp duty. Accordingly a demand draft was made out by Sharan favouring the registrar's office and given to Gem. All transactions were in white money.These very documents had been the bank lawyer's basis for verification, ("We were not supposed to go through another lawyer as per the bank's instruction") whereafter the bank had sanctioned the loan. Now, the same bank lawyer was displeased. This was not making sense... Leaving work, he ran to Gem Builders, but Gem declined to make any change to the sale deed. "This is the deed format that every buyer has and it has worked quite well for all of them."When Sharan told the bank lawyer this, the latter shrugged and said, "Well, then the loan cannot be disbursed." Sharan was shell shocked. Now there was no loan, and, as is wont to happen in the lives of those buying their first house, Sharan was running back to back so that the day he would get the loan cheque he would retire his tenancy, and the same day Joyce would give that cheque to the seller of his new house and simultaneously hand over 9B to Sharan. The planning was so tight, there was not even half a day to bargain. So, as luck went, his tenancy was handed to the next tenants, Joyce was unable to pay for his new property, and hence did not hand over 9B. Net net, as they say, Sharan, his wife, mother and daughter were on the streets. Harried by the amount he had already spent on a loan that was moonshine, Sharan asked that the loan processing fees, property surveyor charges, and the taxi money be repaid. The bank refused.And thus, the Ranganathan family hired a lawyer, who filed a case against the bank and the builder in the consumer court.In the consumer court —The court: The bank insisted on including some more clauses in the sale deed, which was not agreed to by the builder. The builder contended that it was a standard draft of the sale deed. Thus there was difference of opinion between the bank and the builder over the contents of the sale deed, and because of this, the sale deed could not be executed. The bank had also suggested that Joyce's name be on the sales deed. But the builder did not agree...Sharan's counter: Not true! James Joyce's name does appear on the sale deed! But the bank wanted it moved on page one. Gem refused to make any changes. How does it make the sale deed invalid?Bank's lawyer: Although James had assigned his right to the flat in favour of Sharan, the deed of assignment did not adequately protect the interest of our customer Sharan. It was only fair to make the assignor James, a party to the sale deed. And, how was he protecting my interest when he asked me to buy Ulips? thought Sharan.The Builder argued that he had sold 700 apartments using the same sale deed format. Point being made was that this was a standard sale agreement and nearly 55 per cent of the buyers had availed bank loans and were now cooking in those flats and watching IPL as well. Sharan: The document that was used by everyone and technically called the sale agreement was for the land value only, and there was a construction agreement that was always appended to it. The bank had seen the land agreement, the construction agreement, assured itself that the cost of the apartment to the original buyer was Rs 36 lakh, that the guidance value was Rs 21 lakh, and that was how they were sanctioning me Rs 18 lakh and not Rs 7 lakh as loan!Bank: Gem had reduced the consideration for the sale to Rs 7 lakh for the purpose of registration. This violated the provision of the Stamp Act. This was why we wanted the inclusion of Joyce as a confirming party so that our esteemed customer Sharan Ranganathan's interests were protected!Sharan: Disagree! Not tenable. Because James Joyce's name does appear in the sale agreement. Two, the builder has not changed any value. Stamp duty has been paid on the guideline value, that is, the value that the local authority demanded as legal and correct. What was more, the builder had even taken a demand draft from me favouring the local authority. Bank has seen copy of that DD. So a claim that there was a violation of the Stamp Duty Act or any kind of defrauding of the government, is mischievous. When the Court sought to blame the builder, Gem got upset and said that the issue at hand was non-disbursement of loan that concerned the bank and Sharan and had nothing to do with Gem Builders. Hence, if the loan was not sanctioned by the bank, the builder could not be dragged to court or held liable for anything. Sharan argued that the instrument germane to sanctioning the loan was the sale deed. But since others had availed of bank housing loans on an identically constructed/worded agreement, this was a non-issue that the bank was raising without grounds. The consumer court held: "There is no dispute. If we probe the facts of the case, it shows that the bank proposed to sanction the loan on the builder executing the sale deed in favour of the complainant, Sharan. The difference arose only over the contents of the sale deed. The bank has insisted that James Joyce, who is the assignor, should be made a party to the sale deed."Sharan: Disagree! The loan was sanctioned a month ago based on exactly these three documents. James appeared on the last page then too. These were seen by the same lawyer, for which he took a hefty charge as survey fees, processing fees, etc. The bank gave me a letter sanctioning the loan. So there is no question of ‘proposed to sanction'.break-page-breakSo here was a unique situation. Sharan was the aggrieved party because he had applied for a loan and paid all kinds of monies to have it sanctioned. It was sanctioned but not disbursed. The bank was blaming the builder, and vice versa. And in a quaintly derived verdict, the court went on to say, "These things go to show that the parties could not agree about the contents of the sale deed and because of that the transaction could not materialise. The bank wished to protect the consumer's interest and its own. After all, they are giving the loan for a property, which was the subject matter of a disputed sale deed. Since the deed was defective, and both Sharan and Gem also did not agree to the changes, the loan could not be completed. Hence, it cannot be said that it is a deficiency in service by the bank."Sharan argued: "Fair, then kindly let the bank explain how were the terms agreeable when they sanctioned the loan. It was on the basis of the sanction that we made other financial decisions that are now irreversible. The Hon'ble Judge may please know that between the sanctioning of the loan and the date the disbursement was refused, that is, 15 hours, those documents have not undergone any change!"But the court continued: "Hence we are of the opinion that the complaint is liable to be dismissed and this is being held against the complainant Sharan Ranganathan."Sharan sat there looking at the airbrushed photos of various Gandhis on the walls, and asked himself: what am I doing here? How did I reach this state where I have to hear people like these conclude so strangely? The judge continued: "The complaint is frivolous... because even though the bank wanted to give the loan, it could not as the sale deed could not be executed. Hence, the bank cannot be blamed and the transaction did not fail due to its fault or omission. Yet the complainant has filed a complaint. We hold such a complaint to be frivolous... and it is a fit case to invoke Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and to impose a fine of Rs 10,000 payable by Sharan to each of the opposite parties: the bank, its lawyer and the builder..."This was most bizarre. Sharan looked at all of them — the strange banker, the stranger judge. The strangest of them all was the Mahatma... what is he doing here? Distraught, Sharan asked his lawyer, "If the sale deed was germane to the loan transaction, how did the bank sanction the loan? Where are their checks and balances? Or was that just a ploy to get me to buy the Ulip? Is not the subsequent refusal to disburse the loan after sanctioning it a contravention of its contractual responsibility to me? Sharan argued, "How do I get blamed for a sale deed that is not tenable, that I had no hand in preparing? Did they tell me the deed was defective when I presented my loan application? No! They accept it, survey the property, charge me for legal services, make me buy a Ulip and then say ‘Oh but...!' Yet, the only one who can make changes to the sale deed is Gem. But they claim ‘standard practice'! Therefore, if that is standard practise, and 400 other residents have availed of loans from banks, how is it my fault? How does it become a frivolous complaint? Worse, I am being asked to pay them fine money? If this is not insane, what is?"Sharan's HR head, Daksh Sirur was appalled: "This is like a nightmare! But here it is, at our doorstep... We the educated, literate with our IIMs and IITs and MITs, sit passively, fumbling! No wonder my brother refuses to have children! This kind of future would be a curse on them!"Meanwhile Sharan ran to another bank, X, and applied for a loan, this time at 10.5 per cent. The loan was processed in due course and disbursed too. With this higher rate, Sharan was out of pocket by Rs 4 lakh, including all the freebie money he had paid the previous bank. Bank X had also examined the sale deed, the construction agreement and the agreement between Joyce and Sharan, and found them all suitable to extend the Rs 18 lakh-loan. Sharan's divisional president Gautam Vasisht had been shaken by the verdict and the penalty on Sharan. "I don't believe this!" he had said. He read out from the second page of the "Court's Order", which was duly stamped and signed by all kinds of ‘responsible' human beings. "Daksh, listen to this. ‘The bank approved of the loan, but did not disburse it for reasons known best to them.' This is how they begin their Order. I am taken aback. What on earth is that supposed to mean? Seriously, I would ask you to take our legal department's help and fight this on the back of ‘verdict that is contradictory to understanding'. If they aver that they do not know why the bank has refused to disburse the loan, how the heck can they give a verdict that Sharan's complaint is frivolous or even that the bank ‘cannot be blamed and the transaction did not fail due to its fault or omission'? So where does that verdict come from? Either the court does not know why the bank refused the loan, or it does. Which is it?"Then again, listen to this. Here, in para two of their Order, it says, ‘The complainants (Sharan) were in urgency to take the loan and because of that they were asked to simultaneously process the loan application without waiting for legal opinion and... have proceeded simultaneously.' This order assumes the bank's intentions by saying complainant was in a hurry! But that cannot explain why it sanctioned the loan, isn't it? There is a darn sanction letter in writing and stamped, for heaven's sake. How does a bank do that? Wow, and look at this Daksh, did you read the sanction letter? You can nail the bank on this. Nowhere does it say that this is a conditional sanction! If anything, read the last line in the sanction: ‘Please note the above sanction is valid for only three months.' Nothing more!"Daksh: All this points to a complete absence of ethical people management — at the bank, at the builder's, at the court. Each of them has held on to his argument, and together they are seeking to drive the nail into Sharan's coffin. Who are these people answerable to? It is as if all these bodies exist to provide employment to various humans but not to perform a duty. Who will audit their decisions and verdicts?Who owns their respective consciences? This is the state of almost all of India. Nobody does a values check before acting. No questions of ethics have ever been resolved in our country. Everybody acts from behind the fig leaf of a damn designation. Who will bell the person behind that designation?"Classroom DiscussionWhy is the delivery of justice seen as victory or defeat, and not as fairness?(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 07-11-2011)
Read More
History shows that where ethics and economics come in conflict, victory is always with economics. Vested interests have never been known to have willingly divested themselves unless there was sufficient force to compel them. — B.R. AmbedkarHas the consumer court, which is responsible for dispensing justice, looked at the letter or the spirit of the law? This case raises many such uncomfortable yet very important questions. Let us deal with some of them here.Why does the builder or the bank exist? To serve customers; else they will quickly be consigned to the dustbin of history. The bank's lawyer has drowned himself in technicalities and tried to delude himself into believing that he is acting in the interest of the customer. He has lost sight of the end goal — the goal of serving customers. Even if we accept that the bank had the best intent, should it not graciously reimburse the expenses — the loan processing fees, property surveyor charges, etc.?Yes, the builder had indeed reduced the consideration price for the sale, probably to avoid stamp duty. And the bank was right in insisting that this be corrected; but not as an afterthought, not after having sanctioned the loan, and certainly not at Sharan's cost.The builder, on the other hand, is an epitome of arrogance — "We have sold 700 apartments using the very same standard agreement." What does it take to make minor modifications in the sale deed, like the one about bringing James Joyce's name on the first page? Nothing at all. Moreover, the bank has gone back on its word, refusing to disburse the loan after having sanctioned it. Did anything change materially between sanction and disbursal? Nothing at all. Banks are supposed to be the bastion of diligence and good processes. Could this bank not have been a little more careful before sanctioning the loan?Clearly, different departments within the bank are working at cross-purposes and chasing departmental targets — the agent selling insurance policies and the lawyer with zero tolerance. In the end, the bank achieved its insurance target, but Sharan was left without his loan. The bank was either too clever or very risk averse — both are a problem. The bank will do well to remember that employees and customers alike punish companies that try to be ‘too clever'.What is the role of the court? The court is supposed to be constituted of wise men. Can such men of wisdom say "for reasons best known to the bank" and pass an order without even making an effort to understand why the loan was not disbursed?Real justice expects the court to weigh in with the disadvantaged and the less powerful. In this case, the ‘balance of power' lies with the bank and the builder. They can engage the best legal minds and build an argument that is technically right but morally wrong. The court's job is to uphold what is morally right. Failing which, issues will go to the people's court — and we know the consequences of that. Divorced from ethics, dispensing justice is reduced to a mere technicality.‘The law is blind' is a paradigm of people frozen in the past. This court is expected to show empathy and sensitivity — placing itself in the shoes of the customer (after all it is a consumer court), and understanding Sharan's anguish and his loss.The court order makes an assumption without basis. For instance, how did it infer that Sharan was in a hurry to progress the application? Such errors lead to a ‘credibility crisis'. The verdict should have been to offer compensation to Sharan, to cover his expenses and compensate for the agony caused, and not to penalise him. What a travesty of justice! The courts are accountable too — to their conscience.The second bank disbursed the loan smoothly, albeit at a higher price. So does accountability improve with price? It would worry me no end if the answer is a ‘yes'.Every organisation rewards certain behaviours, and what gets rewarded gets practised. For example, behaviours such as putting procedure before people, disbursing a loan only when there is zero risk, etc., have their place and value. But sometimes they are an anachronism. The bank, the builder and the court are in serious need of reforms.Lastly, who is the winner in this case? It is Sharan. He may have lost at the consumer court, but he has won in the eyes of the people. Instead of suffering in silence or showing apathy, he fought, and he deserves applause for this. He will survive; the builder and the bank will not.It is thanks to people like Sharan that there has been a dramatic change in our focus on ethics. We have made more progress in the past five years than in the previous five decades.Sudheesh Venkatesh is the chief people officer at Azim Premji Foundation. He holds a postgraduate degree in management from IIM, Calcutta(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 07-11-2011)
Read More
What is the truth? James Joyce bought an apartment from Gem Builders for Rs 36 lakh. He did not register the property but paid the transfer charges to the builder and put it up for sale for Rs 45 lakh. He found a buyer, Sharan Ranganathan, who needed a bank loan to buy the apartment. In addition to paying the stamp duty on the guideline value and registering the property in his name, Sharan also needed to ensure the legal validity of the agreement between James and the builder, which he did and it was part of the sale deed he presented to the bank. Nothing wrong. Looks simple on paper, does it not? The second bank granted Sharan the loan. There was no ambiguity or argument.So the real problem that Sharan had with the first bank had nothing to do with the truth. It had to do with the sense of injustice that Sharan, the aggrieved, felt from the judgement of the consumer court. The judgement was based on legal technicalities and the manner in which the facts were presented, which obfuscated the whole truth. In the end, the whole purpose of appealing to the consumer court seemed to have been defeated because the appellant was punished for no fault of his. It was the bank that went back on its own sanction, but the honourable court made Sharan the villain. When these two events are seen against their respective outcomes, the conclusions are baffling. The second bank did not contravene any rules or statutory requirements. So on what basis did the consumer court pass its judgement? Did it see the truth, or was the judgement based on the presentation of the truth by the lawyers and the judge's interpretation?Justice in any judicial system cannot be bereft of the context. Neither can it ignore the purpose for which any society creates judicial institutions. What is the purpose of any consumer court if it denies the consumer the right to protection from malicious business practices like coercion? The bank harassed Sharan by making him pay for all expenses while it would earn interest on the loan. Is this part of any banking regulation, or the bank's own imposition on Sharan? That question was never raised and answered.Coercive business practices and harassment by the bank are, therefore, the core of the consumer issue. Does linking the sale of an insurance policy to loan sanction tantamount to restrictive trade practice? It also sets the context for examining the bank's actions, which can be questioned at every point of interaction. If the sale deed, which is key to this discussion, was unacceptable to the bank, how was the loan sanctioned? Does a consumer's subsequent commitment, which affected his life (Sharan gave up his rented residence), based on inaccurate information from the bank when it sanctioned the loan, have no relevance in the court? That brings me to the purpose of the consumer court. Why does it exist? Is it to entangle the consumer in legalities, or truly protect the consumer from insidious business? Justice is not merely a delivery of judgement sanctioned by the letter of law; there is also a spirit. In this case, the law failed to appreciate the human cost. Sharan is a consumer completely at the mercy of the bank and the builder's code of business. The consumer court should have been a recourse to protect his vulnerability, which was exposed and exacerbated by the contradiction in the bank's actions. Surely the matter of sanctioning and disbursing loans is not a peculiar or frivolous activity for a bank. There are well-defined guidelines for it. Which begs the question does this contradiction get flagged off as a marker for poor branch management? Why should consumers like Sharan be responsible for management irresponsibility? When this contradiction caused such misery to Sharan that he literally was on the streets, how did the consumer court gloss over it?Worse, in spite of a clear reference to the forced sale of an insurance policy, the honourable court failed to take any notice of a clear contravention of fair trade. In addition to this, the transfer of a bank's business costs to a consumer's account must be as per published business guidelines of the bank. Why was Sharan not made aware of that when he applied for the loan? Why was it almost made out as a necessary condition for sanction? Again, there were no questions raised on this issue that could have been treated as a coercive practice. When it was pointed out, again no notice was taken. If the purpose of the consumer courts is to protect the interest of consumers, this case highlights a clear need to examine the facts against the context of the bank's behaviour. Bare facts only tell half the story; the real truth emerges from the context. Because the context highlights the intent. And in this case, it was the intent that needed questioning. Unfortunately, that seems to have got lost in the technicalities.Subhabrata Ghosh is CEO of Celsius100 Consulting, which specialises in business and brand differentiation(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 07-11-2011)
Read More
Kapil's father worked for 37 years, perhaps with a single employer. To him, retirement may have been an unwelcome and dreaded event — a passage into long days of watching the clock, diminishing social influence and an un-ending struggle to balance a meagre pension income with exploding costs of living. From that stand-point, Kapil's professional contemporaries are better blessed. With multi-million rupee salaries, most can put aside a reasonable nest egg by the time they are into their 40s. A liberal education and a sense of economic well-being early in life gave Kapil and his generation the wherewithal to ask deeper questions — Do I need to be an employee all my life? Do I have to be ‘his master's voice'? Is destiny handed down to me or do I make my own destiny? What's the larger purpose of my life? Kapil had reached that cross-road in his life. The sense of partnership he had enjoyed with Aniljeet for six years had been on the wane. Aniljeet, like many of his industrialist peers, embraced and pursued the ‘bigger is better' philosophy, may be with a sense of urgency. In the process of getting bigger, the means were sacrificed at the altar of speed. Short-cuts, quick-fixes, forcing jump-step deadlines, over-working people and worse, buying favours; all these are not only considered acceptable but possibly have become the preferred conduct. The Wall Street-dictated measure of ‘quarter on quarter' growth is seen as the axiom of wealth creation by the corporate biggies. This game of creating analyst perceptions and inflated market caps to be recognised as a rich, famous and powerful corporate captain may have been Aniljeet's motivation.Yet, history will tell us how greed and avarice had bankrupted and decimated mighty corporations such as Lehman Brothers, Enron and WorldCom. Clearly, corporations themselves are not to be blamed. The blame may be apportioned to the executive and board leadership for the decisions and choices they made. But within the coterie of such leadership would be one powerful person, invariably the chief executive, who may have lobbied, manoeuvered, pushed or dictated these organisations to temporary recognition and stardom.Sustainable success does not have easy and convenient answers. It comes through hard work, deliberation, open debate, accommodation of multiple view-points, a strong sense of ethics and sensitivity to public opinion.Aniljeet may have started off with noble intentions but along the way got influenced by the ambient industrialist culture — to quickly collect the trappings of success, no matter how. Steadfast and honourable, Kapil had begun to worry that he was slowly getting sucked into the vortex of Aniljeet's agenda.Kapil seemed to be pliable at the edges. He plunged full length into work and its visible manifestations and colluded with the work pressures and deadlines. Unwittingly, Kapil was partnering Aniljeet's scheme of things.At the core, Kapil was cognizant of the many things that were not going quite right. Compromises in raw material and product quality, people quitting because of poor integrity in the work culture, work-life imbalances and employees being made ‘yes men', were some of the symptoms. Kapil had begun to realise that by continuing as the HR chief at Taffet Group, he was naively legitimising Aniljeet's behaviour. As the HR head, he was committed to certain professional principles — of working towards the creation of an ethical and value-driven organisational culture.Kapil reached the conclusion that he was professionally-bound to provide feedback and facilitate a change in approach, or quit. Fortunately, the bedrock of their earlier relationship enabled an open dialogue. Kapil admired Aniljeet's dynamism and ambition. Yet, there were obvious parts to Aniljeet's personality that were an anathema. Whether Kapil realised it or not, he had in a sense become Aniljeet's alter ego. Aniljeet had clearly vanquished his alter ego.Kapil's attempts to engage in a dialogue ended invariably in a monologue with patronising comments like, "Animals survive, we have to thrive" and "This is the difference between a middle class person and me. You can't be adventurous!"Also, Aniljeet's near contemptuous response to Kapil's resignation are all symbolic of a man who has lost his sense of humanity. Kapil is fearful that his exit chat with Aniljeet is likely to suffer a similar outcome. Kapil's lament to friend Inder explains his predicament, "My problem is that I am not getting a chance to stop the wheel I am on… I don't think there is anyway I can stop the wheel."Worthily, Kapil was grounded and continued an inner dialogue with himself. He acted on his conscience. Contrarily, Aniljeet's lack of empathy only shows up his infamy. Kapil acted on his ‘truth' — he will live peacefully with himself. Jeswant Nair is the global group director of human resources at the Iffco Group of Companies. He is based in the UAE (This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 29-08-2011)
Read More
This case reinforces the paradox that is India — one of the most progressive nations by way of rules and regulations, and one of the worst in terms of compliance. Not only is our compliance poor, we seem to take pride in breaking rules, often showcasing the lack of respect of rules as a uniqueness of the Indian context. It is no wonder that a dialogue from a latest Amitabh Bachchan movie — "Hum line ke peechhe nahi hota, line hamare peechhe banti hai" — actually gets hoots of approval, and the story of a rule breaking-cop gets the best movie of the year award! Not only do we take false pride in breaking rules, but often breaking them is seen as a sign of ‘power'. Do we realise the cost of this attitude ? Breaking traffic rules compounds the traffic chaos and everyone suffers. Breaking civic rules comes at a healthcare cost. Breaking economic rules distorts economic growth leading to social costs, the list goes on….Do we as a nation need to change this attitude or not? Aren't we ‘India Shining' in spite of this flaw in the national character? Hardly anyone would disagree with the argument that had we as a nation been rule-compliant, we would have got more from the same human and economic effort than what we are getting now. The future for India would not be about doing more, but about doing better. For this, respect and compliance to rules and regulations are necessary. But with the rot so deep and omnipresent, how do we steer the ship to start changing course? Our years of experience in developing cultures around rule compliance tell us that there are four crucial elements of developing a rule-compliant company or society, which we call the 4S framework. Stakeholder interest in the rule; Source credibility of the rule-maker; Speed of implementing punishments; Spending penalties collected transparently on public good. Before explaining each of these let us agree on one premise that barring a few, most people would rather abide by rules if they are fair and hassle-free.Stakeholder interest in the rule. Many a rules are made without a thought to identifying key stakeholders who have an interest in making the rule work. Every rule needs one or more stakeholders who need to make it work. Implementation may require empowerment of these stakeholders in some way. Let me illustrate with an example: littering and encroaching of footpaths. The key stakeholder for this is actually the hawker or the retailer. The better the walking area, the more the footfalls, and the more the business. So the best guardian for implementing the litter rules and encroachment rules are the licenced hawkers and retailers. Bangkok has worked this successfully. Even the coconut vendor will fine his client if the shell is thrown outside the garbage can! The result: clean streets.Source credibility of the rule-maker. A big thing for Indians is who has made the rules. If the rule-maker is seen as corrupt and slothful, such as the police departments, the municipal corporations, the electricity boards, etc., even the most rule-abiding people will want to try to break the rules. DMRC or the Kolkata Metro are seen as clean and efficient and public laps up any rule they make. Even when a municipality such as Surat was run by a clean and efficient administration after the plague, it became the cleanest city in Asia. When the courts order use of seat belts, the country complies while all the other traffic rules made by the police are not obeyed. Source credibility is, therefore, a key element to an overall atmosphere of compliance. Speed of implementing punishments. When rules are broken and culprits caught, if the process of meting out punishment is long and arduous, people will break more rules to get out of it. But if punishment is fair and fast, most people will comply. It is not the penalties that are the problem. Spot fines in small amounts have greater impact than larger doses of fines. Paying Rs 50 hurts as much as paying Rs 500 because pride gets hurt. The rule-makers have to realise that quantum of fine is not the deterrent; speedy implementation of punishment is.Spending penalties collected transparently on public good. If you knew that the fine or penalty you are paying goes to give succour to widows and families of martyred policemen, or that litter fines are used to repair roads or make shelters for homeless you are more likely to agree in letter and spirit to the rules. If you believe in them, you tend to comply more often. Even when you break the rule you are willing to graciously bear the penalty. Make the entire loop of the rule for a larger public good, and both compliance and its penalty for breakage becomes efficient. Utilising this 4S structure helps develop models of rules that start steering the society towards better compliance.Rajan Chhibba is managing director of global consulting firm Intrim Business Associates.rajan(at)intrim(dot)net(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 01-08-2011)
Read More
‘Do unto others as you would like for others do unto you'. As per this statement, every one of us should be honest in our thoughts and deeds.But interestingly, the corollary seems to be more in vogue: ‘Do unto others what others do unto you.' Fierce cut-throat competition today is leading to ready use of unethical and unlawful means to achieve results. The most common defence from a non-conformist would be "I did not violate by choice", "I am not the only one who did so" and "I did not break the queue till I found a whole lot of people doing so".Honking and switching lanes is not unlawful but considered inappropriate in most countries, and is religiously monitored. But the same people are tempted to break the norms while in other countries. An individual will tend to cut loose from the system when the consequences create a prospect of earning. So, one would be provoked to follow the path of least resistance.Kerala has the highest literacy levels, yet the most strikes and lockouts. The same employees from Kerala are regarded as versatile, flexible and adaptive in their work style by their employers in West Asia.In both cases, what has changed is the environment in the form of peer pressure. "One swallow does not make the summer, and given that I cannot change the world all by myself! Why should I stick my neck out?"In this case study, those responsible for the malba fiasco probably have no idea of the inconvenience they have caused others, not once but twice! They were, after all, just doing their job. Sharing views and thoughts, the consultants in the office point us to reasons that make us the kind of people we are. From loyalty and pride for our country to mental sluggishness, it comes down to our history, society and upbringing. Historically, we were always fragmented and never had an integrated unified approach to our governance. The Maharajas and heads of states saw only what was good for them and their state, and never as one country. External powers came, saw and conquered our land several times and successfully implemented the ‘Divide and Rule' policy. The seeds of today's insecurity, selfishness, laziness, lack of respect for others and their work, a deep sense of deprivation, a lax attitude and low self belief were sown then.The result? Generations of Indians born to a country that is so diverse it makes unity sound impossible, given a protected upbringing, taught to be a part of the herd and, at times, pull others down in order to make some space for themselves in the rat race. Culturally, we are taught to not challenge elders, traditions, customs, sentiments, etc. However, these teachings get interpreted and implemented at convenience and are misused and abused. The ‘babu culture' is glorified and encouraged; Indians are used to pushing wads of currency notes under the table to get their work done. Simply put, no one has the time to follow the processes as are laid down. And since work gets done, rules and processes are not seen as necessary. We tend to be more focused on our personal goals, and would not hesitate to aggressively pursue them even at the cost of the goals of the team, unit and organisation and community.Crime, on the other hand, is not really treated with the seriousness that it should be. Our Indian Penal Code covers all varieties of crime. However, the approach continues to be that one is innocent until proven guilty and the onus of proof is on the prosecution. By the time a person is finally convicted or acquitted, the entire reference to context is lost. People's trust in the system is so low that many crimes go unreported. Regardless of the degree of crime, the message to the public is, "The law will take its course." Nothing seems urgent or important enough! Lack of ownership by law makers and the implementers points to the mess we are in today. In a corporate set-up, there is always a fine line between encouraging healthy competition and discouraging a crab mentality. We, as Indians and managers face the same challenge — that of building a collective, positive and productive approach among our people. Perhaps the solution lies in the endless circle of responsibility, accountability, ownership, introspection and improvement. This is definitely an evolving process and needs time to show results. However, ‘time' needs a healthy leadership, robust culture and well-defined processes to develop and nurture a positive and collective attitude of accomplishment, while displaying dignity of labour and instilling a firm sense of self-security in the employees' minds.The moot question remains: will more compliant people lead to better conformance or does the ‘compliance culture' influence more people to conform? If we have to create a more compliant community, our focus should be on increasing the cost of non-conformance, educating masses on benefits of conformance and bringing about a shift from control to self-discipline.J.M. Prasad is chief of human resources at ING Vysya Bank(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 01-08-2011)
Read More
Jaikishore Valia entered the office dragging in a trail of muck. First the teaboy shouted: "Arre saab!" Then others turned to see and they saw plump droppings of mud on the floor and presently they saw that the hem of his trousers were soiled too. It was 10 am. A disinterested JK told the teaboy, "Tum chai lao, bas!"Abhay Mathur had also heard the teaboy's yelp. He came out of his room and saw the lumps and the people standing and staring at JK. Abhay put an arm around his shoulder as he sat on the chair next to him. JK looked at him sweaty and tired. "Those mud lumps?" Abhay nodded. "Okay, I will tell you," began JK. People put their computers on ‘sleep' mode... when JK told his stories, life stood still, usually. "An agency came and did some water work outside my garage, a few days ago," began JK, "and they filled it with loose mud. Next day it rained; so the filling caved in, developing a deep concavity. That day I could not get my car out of the garage. The municipal fellows came last evening and pumped it with malba. It grew into a huge convex bump. This morning when I drove out from the garage, my car hit the muddy bump, and got trapped over it. I stepped out and stepped right into the gooey bump. So both feet... all mud. The car was stuck, I was a mess, daughter was getting late for school, and my wife had left by the front door locking up and... oh never mind! What a day! I hired a rickshaw and dropped Aarti at school... yes, like this! What to do! Her teacher's expression on seeing me ... never mind..." Shabad Kher, a young intern from Arsha College was sitting nearby. He saw how demeanours changed when life changed. Everyone around him was angry. They all recalled the taxes they paid and the flags they hoisted and what joy the country evoked while singing the national anthem. Qureshi, however, had held on to the quaint word ‘malba' that JK used. He said, "So, malba is versatile. I thought it was waste. The whole city has random piles of malba here there and everywhere. Back home, Bangalore is also dotted with malba piles. We must set up an MPO, malba processing outsourcing."Dorji: My neighbour built a bungalow. Their rubble lay between his home and mine. It blocked my parking spot. I requested the garbage cleaner to remove it. He said, "Yeh mera kaam nahi hai." Thus I discovered there is a rule on malba: whoever creates it, has to lift it. Now this is a fabulous law because the person unloading his malba does not leave behind his business card. So all malba is anonymous. Nobody knew where malba was disposed. So we asked 10 other neighbours and they said some van comes. But nobody knew which van and where it comes from. Then I learnt that there are designated malba areas. People of a locality drop their malba there and something happens to it there. Nobody really waits to find out!A deep mystery laden-air descended on the consultants at Ably-T as they pondered on where the malba really went. The teaboy brought multiple cups of tea and nodded in friendship at JK and said, "Peelo saab..." as if he was offering him a contraband solution.Malba had set the minds rolling. Presently, the eight consultants and senior consultants went into contemplation, when Balbir walked in: late, wet and apologetic."Yaar...!" he groaned and left the sentence incomplete until someone yelled at him to complete it. He said, "Problem with Presto India. The systems we designed are not working well. Implementation mein ghapla hai (colloquial for ‘mess up')."JK: That's the problem. We inherit the genes from our country. Everyone designs rules, regulations, systems, but no one implements them.Balbir: Correct! The controls we created have not even been circulated! So the flowchart says one thing, the execution is something else! The VPs are fire fighting and imagining that the systems will get up and implement themselves! Why did they order this systems review when even the last study recommendations have not been implemented?This is like the litter fine in Delhi. In the 1950s, a little known rule was created that if the sidewalk outside your house is littered and dirty, you are liable to a Rs 50-penalty. But it was never applied. In the past 10 years, the fine has been increased to Rs 1,000, but we still see litter.Jaimini (as others laugh): Possibly, somebody decided to review the law along with other laws, but not the implementation. How come we are all like that? How can we review a system and not its implementation? break-page-breakBalbir: Arre forget litter, do we have laws against urinating on street walls? For spitting?Jaimini: Do you need a law for these? A taxi driver in Mumbai once made the most marvellous comment. We were waiting for the signal near Churchgate station and the crowd had just emerged from the station; a huge mass of humans. Just as the light turned red for the pedestrians, two cops on either side of the pavement held them back with a fat rope. Seeing a stray dog standing by quietly, the cabbie said, "Even an animal knows how to behave, lekin insaan ko to rassi se rokna padta hai!" I think it is Singapore where if you are caught littering more than thrice, the penalty is to clean the streets on Sundays wearing a bib that says, ‘I am a litterer'. This will then be broadcast on the local news.Abhay: One reason why implementation is not even attempted is that when people get caught, the mechanism for penalising them is long drawn out and sometimes even pointless in its direction. Implementation includes penalty. Whether it is traffic violation, jay walking or spitting, the penalty should be instant, on-the-spot. Same for litigation in India. If anyone breaks the law in India, the aggrieved as well as the errant, both know they will get stuck for years in the naag paash of the law. By and large people understand that there have to be rules, and that they have to be penalised if they are caught, but what worries them is the loss of time in that transaction. Balbir: People hire lawyers who help to change the hearing dates repeatedly. This is wrong! Jaimini: Understand the physiology. First, there is a person who does an act that needs to come under the eye of the law. Second is the person who enforces it at a transactional level. Third is the judiciary or punishing body. See, a) I have to catch you when you do wrong; b) I have to report you; and c) the law must take action against you. In our case, if you look at the man who has to enforce the law — the difficulty he faces is that he himself does not understand what procedures he has to follow and what he must do with you. Or he takes steps that are not going to enable enforcement of the law in a manner that will create a foundation for ongoing lawful behaviour/conduct.Abhay: Worse, he chooses not to record a complaint fearing the numerous visits to the court he will have to make when the case comes up! Then there is no pressure to find a time-bound solution! Nowhere does it compel you to resolve the situation within a given period of time! Have you seen some commercial buildings in Gurgaon that have been under litigation for 14-15 years? Have you seen the building that was semi-demolished by the local authority and it continues to stand like an eyesore? JK: Yet, for all the cynicism there is, once, when I carried an abandoned bleeding scooter victim to the Safdarjung Hospital, the cops thanked me and let me go. But our knowledge of the law is: if you help a victim, you will get entangled in a mess... seemingly not! Shabad: The critical issue is: there is no expectation from the law that if you are found guilty of an unlawful act, it will punish you and you must take the punishment and correct yourself.JK: Cor-rect! So, if you want to make it work, you will. If you don't want to make it work, you will say all sorts of things — shareholders have to approve, chairman is unwell, or we will table it when Parliament is in session, or these things are all a threat to parliamentary process, or the buffalo is ill... anything!During the Commonwealth Games (CWG), you could drive from anywhere to anywhere in Delhi in 20 minutes, despite the fact that one lane of all major roads was blocked for Games participants. Instant fines of Rs 1,000 were levied and nobody complained! Why? First, people knew there was a rule. Second, it was enforced. Third, it was enforcement on the spot! No scope for defense or offense. The crime was easily identified! Yet, the moment the CWG was over, it is back to normal! It is the will to enforce! Balbir: And the pressure of performance. It proves that you need a lot of pressure on you to deliver (not perform) or that enough pressure does not exist in order to ensure the execution of the task. Recall... just three weeks before the CWG, what chaos there was. The world wondered if India had the ability to host such an event. Come the big day, everything was ready! So it is not the ability, but the willingness.Jaimini: Okay, examine this. We did a sales analysis for TWC Inc. and found a very unique pattern. Every 12th, 24th, 36th and 48th week of their year, sales were very high. Every 1st, 17th and 33rd week, sales petered off... On discussing this with the sales staff, we gleaned that ‘targets have to be met', ‘appraisals get messed', ‘bonus gets held back' lay behind these spikes. Those high-performance weeks were when the pressure was highest because of the penalty. That is what the country also manifests at a macro level: if a dignitary is coming, we put up banners, trees look better, leaves grow thicker, roads look cleaner; when quarter closing is close, sales pick up... to present a good picture!Abhay: I read a book on how societies work, and the author suggested that some societies are process-driven, some are budget-driven and some societies are on mission mode. Only Indira Gandhi understood that Indians work in mission mode — Operation Green Revolution, Operation Flood... So there was Telecom Mission, Metro Mission, and so forth. Mission mode means it is event-driven. Guests are coming, so I tidy up all the clutter. But as a habit? It requires discipline not process or a mission!Jaimini: I have an explanation... why we are the way we are is owing to our own understanding of our culture. It lies in the way we pray. Culturally, we have learnt to pray for ourselves, at best for our family. But we don't pray for the society, for the country. We do not pray collectively. Because collective good is not a thought that occurs to us. In a priority of things, ‘I' comes before collective good. Our system does not teach us to think as a collective. America's very constitution is founded on the right of the individual, but they have greater rules and respect for the collective.JK: You are right, Jaimini. Secular education — which is greater than spiritual education for the Indian — does not say you are a part of the collective. And spiritual is not cool, so you have no attitude to know or feel that you are a participant and not an acquirer; that you are here to contribute, not take away; that it is by the collective for the collective. But then we don't even get to this point. Shabad heard them all intently. The world out there was intensely complex, he mused. This is the world he was going to enter after his post-graduation... Oh mayn!Balbir: Isn't this because despite economic growth we are having to struggle and fight to survive? To be secure? Jaimini: So that leads to the fact that we have not come around to respecting each other as people. I don't respect you because I do not see why you need to exist, or why you may have a different view of the world.JK: Why do we consult for clients? Create systems and flowcharts? So that the collective is enabled. Respect has its shades. What we don't have is respect for the other person's time. Shabad: Time? How time?Qureshi: When you dirty the streets, when you park in the wrong spot, when you cut lanes, when you block the path by throwing malba, you are saying, ‘I want to survive first' and then ‘even if you cannot as a result'. So everyone is looking out for himself. JK: Aah... very nice. Abhay, you said ‘discipline, not process'. I think we need both and both must be interlinked. Without one, the other cannot be had. What do you discipline if there is no process? It's like saying I have great devotion, but I have nothing to offer it to. So is it willingness? Ability? Discipline? Respect? Process? I will add one more to that. Mental sluggishness. When you have not trained your mind to persevere to make things work, then you have a mind that does not consult the intellect. You don't use intelligence. You live like an animal, from the level of instinct. break-page-breakHe continued, "Let me share a great story that combines all this: from lack of willingness to lack of ability, integrity, intelligence, respect, process and discipline. Abhay and I were in business some 15 years ago. We made some unique computing equipment. We both had great intent to serve a country that had subsidised our engineering education in IIT. After four years, we went broke. We closed our company. That day we owed the bank Rs 5 lakh. The bank had first lien on our assets. So I put all the assets in a tempo, went to the bank manager and said, here are our assets worth Rs 8 lakh. The rule says I have to hand over the assets of the company to the bank. I cannot pay you the money, here are the assets...."The guy did not take it. He said I don't have a mechanism for receiving it. Now see, while bank lends money and has lien on the assets they don't know what to do with it, should you actually go there and hand in your stuff! "Yet they went against us to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, a fast track court for settling bank dues for non-payment. They filed a case against us. This is mental sluggishness, a mind that does not think. Simultaneously, we filed for closure of the company but our case just would not come up for hearing. The clerk turned out to be someone from my village in Punjab. He said, ‘Bhaiji, if you file for liquidation, the board assumes you are a thief; that you have done some gadbad. So even if you are clean, the case will go on for years. They have to examine you for malpractice!' "The official liquidator said to me, ‘Abhay Mathur is your friend. You owe him, according to your balance sheet, Rs 12,585. Why don't you ask him to sue you to recover the amount? That will be faster.' So the advice was, if you want a closure, let your friend sue you! Where are the rules and what is being implemented? This is also the mind that cannot think."So we had to hire another lawyer, and Abhay sued me. It was a crazy situation. My best friend and I are working at his wedding preparations. He is buying me clothes and I am running after the tent-wala... and he has sued me. We have two lawyers, we are paying those lawyers to help Abhay sue me. So everybody knew what the game was, including the judge. Before long, Abhay got married, his brother got married, Abhay had a child, his brother had twins, but the case did not come up for hearing."Nine years later, the hearing was announced. My wife (I too went and got married, what the hell!) said to me, go break a coconut in Hanumanji's temple and then put your foot in the court! I did even that. I enter the court and there it says, ‘Jaikishore Valia versus Official Liquidator — postponed, New Date.' Why? These are the mysteries of life, not esoteric stuff like how does a pupa turn into a butterfly."One day when I could take it no more, I went to the judge and said, ‘I want to move on, please can I get a hearing? Nobody is objecting to the closure — not me, not my partner, not anybody else. Since 1993, we are asking to close. But all I get is three new dates every year! What is the issue? The assets have been handed to the liquidator, I have hired a room to store all that, the goods are rotting, I am paying rent for that room...'"The judge heard me for the three minutes that it took to rave and rant and said, ‘Rs 12,585 — you are closing the company. Okay, I order closure!' And I thought it was done. "Closure is a process where the liquidator has to realise the maximum from the assets he has taken possession of. In 1992, I had taken assets valued at Rs 8 lakh to the bank and they would not take it. Then, 13 years later, some wise man said, if the goods have a book value of Rs 8 lakh, the realised value should be at least Rs 1 lakh. They got into a fresh bout of tizzy, 13 years later! The liquidator called three raddiwalas, who offered Rs 7,000! And to accomplish all this, Abhay and I spent 80k from our pockets! Now you thus see lack of process, discipline, respect for my time, willingness, everything! "And 13 years of mental space lost by going to court month after month to check the hearing dates. And those assets? In 1992, they were terrific. If we had not decided to close down, we would have been using them! They could have been sold to recover Rs 8 lakh." Silence fell as the rain hummed outside. Balbir said, "It is participation, contribution, the spirit of the collective for the collective! The spirit of national pride... that is what is missing!"Abhay snorted in disdain. "All that is romantic and stupid. Nuts and bolts, it is about mental honesty. Adhering to rules, to a system is about respect. Respect comes from inner honesty... We are pathologically a dishonest people... take it or lump it!"To be continuedClassroom DiscussionIs it that our leadership is not driving excellence? Or is it that it is not passionate about collective glory?casestudymeera(at)gmail(dot)com(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 01-08-2011)
Read More
Chaitanya Suri comes across as a very down to earth person with his own way of making sense of things, taking appropriate action and being very successful at it. He clearly accepts, perhaps even enjoys, being put into situations that are both challenging and difficult. His approach appears to be very simple: clear ethics; focus on what needs to be immediately sorted; do what is best for the organisation; and take all concerned along without losing focus. Simple and effective.One thing that he is clearly uncomfortable with is standing out as some kind of lone leader. He is the kind of person who is most at ease with the whole group being given credit for success and is almost embarrassed about standing out from the group. He has a strong concern for the group or organisation as a whole and not just one or the other group within the organisation. For example, he tells HR: "This year's appraisals were force rated because we had no money" or "...you take away their increments and give me a carpet?" Clearly Chaitanya has embodied a highly democratic approach, which builds connections. Simply put, here is a very apolitical person with a broad need to be responsible for the whole.Chaitanya has his own way of going about his task. His source of reference is himself; not what he should do but what he believes is the right thing to do. He is at the other end from conventional. Yet he is clear about his inner frame of reference: integrity, involve, collaborate. He feels the pressure of the expectations and perceptions of others on him, but is still quite capable of doing what he thinks best under the circumstances.On the other hand, the leadership of his company, Rollsum, comes across as more conventional. Sujeet Mathur, a board member, says, "Young man, you will get used to it. Good people like you have to go there one day." This statement shows clearly that he does not ‘see' Chaitanya. He sees a category, a type. So Chaitanya is a ‘type' who will inevitably fit into Mathur's way of seeing. There is a patronising quality about this, which also conveys a disconnection from others. If he sees Chaitanya in this way, how might he be seeing others? When a deeply democratic person comes into contact with an authoritarian and political person or group, there is a feeling of two very different world views: the proverbial Mars and Venus. However, Chaitanya is in a very interesting position where if he can hold his own, and can also potentially influence the system or culture to make it move away from the hierarchical. He is also very forthright and strong. Take his comment to Rollsum's chairman, Abhay Acharya: "If you trust me to run your business, how come it is difficult to trust the very first move I choose to make as CEO?" He also says, "But now I do not want distraction, not for a second. Look, all I am saying is keep status quo for 8-10 months, let us achieve a few milestones which I need for the survival of the business, and then we can make whatever cosmetic changes that you want." It is brave of him to come out with such thoughts openly.This man has the courage to stand firm and stay rooted in his values and assessment of what is critical for the organisation, even if he has to go against his seniors. It is perhaps this strength that will help him change the system.However, the dominant culture is pushing, and will push, the expectation on to the ‘reluctant' CEO to conform to what it believes is ‘right', though this is completely at variance from what Chaitanya sees as necessary. In fact, this senior group will also attempt to belittle or smirk at his way of thinking so there can be an enormous pressure on him to fit in with the existing way of doing things.This will undoubtedly cause a lot of stress, especially since Chaitanya is also one who inherently wants to take all stakeholders along in a spirit of collaboration. If he is able to trust his own ‘gut feel' or intuition without too much doubt, there can be a stronger CEO who can potentially make a lot of difference. However, what deeply troubles Chaitanya is not only the outlook of the senior folks, but also his ‘ex-buddies'. The way they give him a wide berth shows how they have also internalised the overall hierarchical attitude in the organisation. This attitude believes differences in level determine frankness. There is a clear feeling of hurt in "Chatni" (as Chaitanya is called by his team) when he sees the sharp difference in the way his peers suddenly start relating to him.There are two choices in front of him: either he fits into the hierarchical way of this organisation or he takes his own inner ‘truth' and uses it as a starting point to bring about a fundamental change in the system — one which is not so stratified, but is a community of people whose relation does not change simply on the basis of shifts such as promotions.Kaushik Gopal is an organisation consultant and leadership coach. He is an associate coach and faculty with the Center for Creative Leadership and works with Chatur Knowledge Networking(This story was published in Businessworld Issue Dated 10-10-2011)
Read More
