Thursday, December 27, 2012

Crisis-time leadership

First of all, A Happy New Year to you.

I wrote about leadership last week as a follow up on the previous week's post. Leadership positions sometime come early if you display the talent. But this talent, I said, gets overexploited. In the run of the daily target the young leader is utilised for his skills but not enough may get invested in developing him further. This often leads to the ripe-from-the-outside-but-raw-within syndrome.


Now there's an interesting blog by Jack Zenger of the Harvard Business Review which takes this thought further. He believes in starting them young but stresses on the criticality of training and the damage possible without it. Do read it at: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/12/why_do_we_wait_so_long_to_trai.html


It is difficult not to look at the leadership issue in the wake of the recent happenings: a gang rape bang in the middle of the capital and nobody from the government stepping forward to take charge and show leadership. Sundeep Khanna writes a super piece in Mint about the leadership of listening; the leadership that needs to have both ears to the ground; the leadership of accountibility. You could read him here: http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/3qqdxxcCKHX9MNhK1bAVZM/Leadership-lessons-from-the-mishandling-of-the-Delhi-protest.html

Thursday, December 13, 2012

From the last POST



Can you enjoy the luxury of sauntering up the learning curve when what you have to do is to climb up a steep pyramid?

The responses to my previous blog post have been thought-provoking. A plethora of subjects have popped out of the stimulating discussion and I hope to keep your attention by turning the spotlight on each one, one post at a time.

But first let me draw your attention to leadership. There’s no end to material available on this one, I know. But it seems to yet be the missing link in the evolution of many an organisation. While large organisations of traditional industries have their in-built patterns of developing leaders through well-oiled processes, it is the younger industries that draw my attention. Since liberalisation we have been witnessing the rise of industries like IT, ITES, asset management and insurance. These are all people intensive. Their pyramids are very steep- the bases are very broad. Hundreds of hands are required to be at the service counter. These first level jobs are a plenty and need very basic qualification. But on the flip side these businesses are characterised by high attrition. So keeping these teams going, giving them the basic training required and meeting the needs of a huge customer base, all at one time is a trying task. Anyone with a spark can become a manager in a short time. This spark however works against him or her eventually because the seniors think he can handle it, so he may have to chew much more than he can bite.

Take the story a little ahead, a lot of managers climb up with excellent task related skills- where ample training is provided. As they take bigger and still bigger responsibilities the chinks in the armour start to show up. This is more often than not related to their dealing with people. For e.g. a senior manager in an MNC consulting firm says “I find it very irritating when people are slow” or another says “ how can they challenge what I say?”

My observation is that everybody agrees that people skills are most critical for a leader. Ironically the investments in this area are rarely commensurate with this criticality.



The question then is: does building of effective leadership require a certain amount of time? Won’t the required maturity be compromised if the roles change vertically too fast? Does it help the individual himself in his long- term growth?

After all, how sweet can that fruit be that has been ripened in haste. Its colour on the outside may be perfect but its taste may leave a lot to be desired.

Thursday, November 22, 2012

I yet don’t know how to react.







At a recent training program at the local office of an MNC I was told unambiguously by the participants: “The rule is clear. If we are told by our ‘white’ counterpart to do it then we just have to do it.” I asked for further explanation before jumping to conclusions. What I was given to understand was that even though the American and Indian offices ostensibly work together, it is understood that one person’s word will have to be accepted over another even at the same designation level. No, that is not done after talking it over but is the diktat straight away.


So what is this?


From the one side the American company may just believe that its local employees are better-equipped to take more suitable decisions than its Indian employees. It may feel that it has better controls this way. It is not so confident about its employees who don’t have the American approach and training. And, it is ready to take the responsibility for that decision.


From the other side, the Indian employee could feel like almost bonded, mute labour. And in such a situation, a designation could become a bit of a joke. The self-esteem of the person who has to work in such a place may take a daily beating. He may stick around but with no interest or sense of pride in his job. Not the best way to grow an organisation, I imagine.


Not surprisingly, I have on many occasions found the energy and morale in this place very low. Lackadaisical time-keeping, initial ennui among participants; unimpressive co-ordination are some of the very unattractive features during the sessions.


So I continue to ponder: What makes people stay in such a work environment? Does the new generation have a completely different, may be a more practical take on this? Am I reacting with the cross of History on my shoulders? Do Indian MNCs have similar, unwritten rules for their employees in the West?


Have you been exposed to this kind of governance, directly or indirectly? Please do share your thoughts.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

How Long?

I remember reading an article in a magazine which displayed the grand salaries that young CEOs had begun to take home. The search company executive quoted said that a competent CEO could be taking home anywhere up to a few crores a year. The examples cited were of CEOs who had hopped jobs efficiently. He concluded explaining that the way to grow the pay packet was to basically not stay in a place for more than three to five years. The cases were mind boggling- like say, a 30-something fellow grows from a senior manager to a CEO many times over in less than a decade.

As I talked to people after that, the general opinion that emerged was that you are perceived as ‘successful’ if you move within five years and a ‘laggard’ if not a ‘loser’ if you don’t. Smart people move. That was the essence.

But recently for some material that we had to put together, Charubala and I were going through the work histories of over a dozen industry and public leaders. Verghese Kurien, K.V. Kamath, Lalita Gupte, Chanda Kochhar, Deepak Parekh, Shikha Sharma, Kalpana Morparia, Bharat Patel, Pradip Shah, Naina Lal Kidwai, Vinita Bali, Shashi Tharoor were among others were those we looked up. And this is what we discovered: None of them had changed jobs more than once or may be twice in their careers; they built their reputations as people of reckoning at jobs they held for generally close to a decade or sometimes more; they moved up stealthily in their companies and organisations and grew their roles and profiles within rather than looking for greener pastures outside.

And was I surprised? For a moment, may be. And then when I thought about it more closely, may be not, really. If one defines success with simply what one is able to buy with his salary one needs to jump on to the former bandwagon. But if you want to become someone who stands for a success story and become an icon, an inspiration, then these case studies indicate that you have to look beyond. You may be a smart mover but people do not understand what you stand for, sometimes. On the other hand, leaders such as these are clearly identified with their beliefs to make the brand they choose, to become a success. So in short, you probably have a longer shelf life as a success story if you build the success of other brands besides your own self. What do you think?

Friday, August 3, 2012

EDGE-OF-THE-CLIFF HR

When one sets out to do Human Resource Management as a student he hardly imagines it comes with perils of becoming a soldier. But the recent case of Maruti human resource manager, Awanish Kumar Dev, has shocked just about everyone.

 There are discussions on every day about the issue from varying angles: Was it pre- meditated? Will the police actually get all the culprits? Who’s behind it all?

It is ironical that sometimes being good at your job can serve against your well-being.

There have been enough cases in the recent past of good men paying for doing their jobs well with their lives- bureaucrats like Satendra Dubey who defied the corrupt road construction mafia in the Golden Quadrilateral Project; policemen like Hemant Karkare, Vijay Salaskar and Ashok Kamte in the Mumbai Kasab killings; journalists like Sushil Pathak of Dainik Bhaskar, J.Dey of Mid-Day and Umesh Rajput of NaiDuniya who got knocked off for knowing too much. A threatening note was found near the scene of Rajput’s murder which said,"Khabar chaapna band nahi karoge toh mare jaoge" (If you don't stop publishing news, you will be killed)."

Dev probably knew which way the issue was building and resigned six months back as did also a couple of his junior colleagues. But while their resignations were accepted, his wasn’t. The management knew he had negotiated very well earlier and now hoped he would re-work the miracle.

 So Dev stood jammed between the arguments of the company and the workers and paid for the disagreement with his life. He tried to do a fair job. He was the one who registered the present workers’ union.  So how exactly did the ones who killed him think that their purpose would be better served this way, we still don’t know. But history has shown clearly that if the key spokesperson of a cause is knocked out of the story, a reasonable delay in decision-making is definitely achieved. This delay can help the perpetrators work out things in their favour. What exactly is happening behind the scene will emerge surely, if slowly, as media goes further into its research.

 So what do such stories and cases do to the rest of us? Do they inspire us to work at our best or can they scare us from going up to the last point? What would we advise our youngsters then? To do glorious, memorable work or to play safe?

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Hail Stephen Covey



Stephen Covey is no more. This news must’ve made many of us turn back the pages of his tome. Or re-look at the notes we made about being effective, along the way.


Keeping the Indian workplace in context I would like to make a few suggestions that could make us more efficient professionals.


1) Be punctual: There are no statistics available for how much lack of punctuality costs us as a country but my guess is it should be a substantial amount. Lack of punctuality means every day, each one of us waits for someone to join the meeting who is held up somewhere else because that meeting did not start on time because someone came late there….. Long hours are spent at the work place but few of those are towards work on several days. And arriving late bothers very few people. Just yesterday a young gentleman was supposed to come and demonstrate his novel, internet promotion idea to us. We were there by 10:15 for the 10:30 meeting. There wasn’t a sound from him until 11:30 a.m. He simply explained that he was held up and he was on his way now. We tried to impress upon him that this was unacceptable. He was unfazed. We did not have the meeting. So in effect he spent four hours on the road and did not meet the potential client. Little wonder that so many of us are working virtually round the clock. This isn’t uncommon. Being ‘held up in traffic’ happens so regularly that I wonder if it is some sort of an epidemic condition

2) Be prepared: That was the motto for us as girl guides. It seems so relevant today. It is a pleasant surprise when the people you are going to meet are well-prepared for the meeting. Often enough a person saunters in with barely a clue of what the agenda is. He/she generally contributes throughout the conversation and confuses the matter till it is like a tangled ball of wool. More than once, the outcome of the meeting has been that we must come and meet the next person and repeat all this. There have been few occasions that what was mailed in advance has been opened and looked at at least cursorily. And often enough, the needs identified are not what we are eventually asked to train for

3) Dress effectively: Casualness in dressing is a recent development and it is being taken to an extreme. I am no prude on what people should wear but we mustn’t, at any point, forget that we are yet at work, no matter whether it’s Friday or a Saturday. It is yet not a beach day. Casual or poor dressing is reflective of our attitude towards our work and where we want to go. We may claim that this is superficial and dressing doesn’t matter. But do you think you will willingly let your daughter go out say, with a fellow with long, matted hair and painted nails? Sorry, but I had to exaggerate to make my point.

4) Be courteous: Good manners and courteousness for some reason are often misinterpreted as weakness. But being courteous and well-mannered just makes you more bearable. And talking with a sneer or with slang or expletives isn’t ‘cool’. It is annoying to anyone ten years older than you and doesn’t make you appear any more intelligent or ‘with it’.

5) Be formal: In the workplace it may be safer to err on the side of formality. Don’t get into backslapping mode the day you join from your MBA college. People may humour you but I strongly suggest that you should let the boss decide if you can abbreviate his name. In our language training experience we’ve had, not surprisingly for us, many incidents where international clients complained about such things. There’s a difference between being friendly and getting familiar. The former is appreciated, the latter isn’t.

6) Take responsibility: The issue seems to belong to no one. It is nebulous, in the Corporate Scenario, where the buck stops. So you can be shunted from one manager to another, getting no wiser about what’s to be done.

7) Keep upgrading: This should be a daily quest. The routine can never be made an excuse for not improving every single day. Every day, every month you should be able to at least explain to yourself why you should get paid better. Reading on the industry, on your subject, on varied interests is for self-development.


Of course this is only my list. Would love to know what piques and pricks you about being one of the links in this corporate world chain.

Sunday, July 1, 2012

ARE WE DIFFERENT? OR ARE WE ALIKE?


The response to my post on Resistance Learning has been considerable. Even more, friends and colleagues located in different countries and markets and from diverse sectors - the US, the UK, New Zealand, public sector and private; from the traditional manufacturing sector to the growing service industries; from marketing professionals to HR people- have responded. They all say that the post rung a loud bell as they experience much the same. A friend who lives in NZ says she literally made notes to remind her of the salient points and shared the piece with her boss. Another said it was her experience all the time- it wasn’t personal most often, it was the situation. Yet another interestingly pointed out from the participant’s point of view- he said he had never thought that he could be conveying this while participating in a program.

It may be interesting to study that while organisations are always investing in ‘acculturising’ their employees to fit into customer markets, there is a core which is common. While the top layers may be different, on the inside we all seem to live with the same fears and apprehensions; with common likes and dislikes; with the same needs for friends, mentors and guides. It becomes more and more awkward to express these needs as we grow in our jobs and age. But deep inside we yet have them if we haven’t been able to quell them.
I can recall some interesting incidents:
1)     Meeting an Indian CEO posted abroad, who needed to know how to open up with employees, and had spent sleepless nights over it.
2)     Identifying the primary cause of discontent and dissent in a company that called me as an external mediator. Turned out that it was the CEO- no less- who everyone complained about not communicating effectively with them. Kudos to the CEO for taking the criticism well and talking across the table. That was surely an amazing experience.
3)     Sometimes the foreigner is a threat: While working in a foreign market, I realised how my local counterpart felt threatened that I may try to wriggle into her company even though she knew clearly that I had to leave in a month.
4)     The new white factory manager with an impressive record spoke to me in private about handling the local factory shop floor workers. He felt them resisting all his proposals, albeit silently. The silent protest of the Indian worker flummoxed him.
5)     And at other times the foreigner is the friend they had always been looking for: I can recall a middle-level manager in a media company speaking professionally over the phone and then swearing, as she replaced the receiver. She confided in me in hushed tones that people in her country just didn’t understand communication! She complained that they were lackadaisical, nit-picking and resistant to change. I could have been sure that she was echoing the words I had heard so often back home.

In this fluid world of similarities and differences it is then oftentimes difficult to define the perfect work personality. However, sincerity towards the job, targeting a problem not a person, keeping an open mind and rising above the temptation of pettiness score as the highest attributes in my experience. But you are cordially invited to fine-tune this list so that we can jointly try to create a perfect prototype!

Friday, June 1, 2012

Resistance Learning


There are those dreadful days in the life of a trainer when she enters a room full of unknown faces beaming out the message “You’re not welcome”. The silent scream is enough to make her turn right back.
In the early days it bothered me a lot. But it doesn’t any more today. That’s because I have figured out –with experience and plain logic- that it’s not personal. They aren’t really saying that to me because they don’t know me till that point in time. Actually what they are resisting is the process they are being put through. Often, they don’t like being told that they need to develop their skills.  People believe that many years of experience are sufficient proof that they know all they’ll ever need to know.
Sometimes it is the choice of days of the week or month. Calling people to work on their off days definitely leads to a sepulchral air in the training room. Another bad choice is the month- end, especially with sales people. In such cases they equate training to punishment rather than a perquisite.
At times, the company has taken a decision to include people in an activity that they don’t want to participate in. They then resist the process because they feel they will be additionally burdened with responsibilities once they are officially trained. These are often activities perceived extraneous to their progress- like say writing for company publications or doing social work.
My learning: 1) People resist learning when they feel it is being shoved down their throats. Adequate pre-counselling most often helps. 2) The human ego grows- ironically- with the feeling of lack of success and achievement. People with the most average performance take the maximum slight to the suggestion that they may need help. 3) Contrary to popular belief, age is not such a big factor. It is not always the older employees who resist training. There are people close to retirement who merrily participate and sit obediently through your class- be it on basics of English grammar or team work. 4) Your approach of mutual learning is appreciated and acts as a balm on sensitive egos. 5) But, at the same time, your confidence in putting forth what you have to say creates a security for them. Every person is happy- secretly or overtly -to have a guide in the area he perceives as his weakness.
And what’s my take-home? I get many more, first-hand examples for my various modules besides another lesson in human nature. I get ideas of what new areas of work we should develop programs in. So this post is a special thanks to all those who provided me with difficult days and accelerated my learning.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

OF BISCUITS AND ATTRITION

Can the biscuits you serve have a direct impact on your attrition rate, I wondered as I munched through some plain,glucose ones- ones I carry as emergency energy boosters in my bag.

The venue and time was the one I am very used to: A training program tea break. I was eating my own biscuits simply because none were served with the tea. As I sat by myself for ten minutes I went over the range of biscuits and snacks I have had in my breaks in the training rooms of various companies. Most days there are a few platters in which the largest number are simple sugar-topped biscuits, a few cashew cookies and a few cream biscuits. The cream biscuits vanish first, the chocolate and cashew cookies go next and the plain ones are the ones that are mostly left over. Then there are days I can remember where we trainers- my colleague and I- were served premium hi-fibre biscuits while the participants were served the regular platters. Very few times there is a wider service- Diet Cokes and big, ginger cookies in a jar. And then there are some even better days when there are sandwiches and biscuits with a range of teas. But to balance off those luxurious tea-times are these kind of biscuitless days when tea is just that- tea from the vending machine!

I have become bolder over the years and nowadays tell the company that biscuits must be served. I mostly hear from the HR person that the peon had been instructed to do so but no one cross-checked or supervised the service. Participants plied with biscuits- the more premium the better- always seem to work more happily. Eating in the middle in no way affects their appetite for lunch.

For the afternoon tea break the biscuits become even more important. The trainer's most testing period is the slump hour that follows lunch. If participants have been kept happily busy in that period it is only necessary to reward them. I can recall some Delhi clients serving pakodas and sandwiches at that time. So do I sound ridiculous when I say that biscuits are rewards and people notice their snacks and meals more than the content of the program? Do I sound pernickety when I demand biscuits for the participants?

What they are served and when they are served seems to me directly reflective of the employer's attitude towards the training and the employee. How important is he or she to you? Is his comfort critical? Is training being done to exhaust budgets or to really develop the executive and the manager?

The interesting thing is that feedback on this matter is never given directly. Or for that matter, feedback on many aspects of the training program that is not the training company's doing is not attributed to those issues directly- be it the choice of days or the number of hours. When you ask them to work on their off days I have to deal with their puckers and when you ask me to extend the working hours they look at me as if I am the hangman.

Unfortunately, the disgruntled feeling that the participants bear in their minds goes as feedback on the entire training program. And that impacts me even though I was not responsible for the experience! So now, do you see now why I demand biscuits for my bunch when I train?

At the cost of sounding mercenary I sometimes wonder is “better feed” directly proportionate to better feedback. Your thoughts?