Punches, Counter-punches, Communication and Development

Its a blistering hot summer in India this time....and guess what, it is not just the Sun that is providing this heat!!! It is election time and all politicians are at their best....I am following the campaigning, the strategies and tactics used by various political parties, the punches and the counter-punches, the possible poll alliances and also the various pre-poll surveys that are taking place. It is absolute fun time. The largest democracy in the world is going in to voting season.

After years of neglect, various roads have got paved in Bangalore. Not sure where the money came in now as the Government has been complaining that there is no money....election time is always magic at its best!!!

While it is good to watch and listen to the theatrics and the various punches and counter-punches that politicians throw at each other, the pre-poll survey shows that most people are worried about inflation, the lack of job creation, lack of growth and development, corruption and the impact all of this is having on their day to day lives. They want to vote for someone who is decisive and someone who will lead the country towards better growth and provide better job opportunities and livelihoods to the millions of Indians who are struggling for a decent living.

I was thinking through as to why the people returned Dr.Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister with a better majority in 2009. His first innings (2004-2009) was good but not great. However, he had managed to capture the imaginations of millions of Indians - promising them a new style of growth for the economy, a breakaway model for employment generation and why inclusive growth was essential. The Indians loved it. He has delivered to some extent on some of these. However, these have been overshadowed by the lack of decision making, the corruption scandals that have broken out, the fact that India has not grown fast enough, galloping inflation and, of course, the total lack of governance. One more issue that has affected the government is the existence of 2 power centres - the Government and the Political Party itself. The Congress Party is, by nature, risk averse. So, they constrained the Government from making bold moves. Contrast this to the same Congress Party in 1992 when the then Prime Minister (Mr.Narasimha Rao) had the same issue during the first year, but managed to distance himself from the Party and arguably managed one of the best performing Governments in the history of India. Whichever party wins, the new Prime Minister will have the same problem and has to learn to negotiate this well. Negotiating skills will need to be sharpened. The ability to carry a large team along will be needed. The ability to strategize the change the country will be essential. A new kind and style of leadership will be needed - someone who is brave, willing to take risks, is decisive, willing to change the country, negotiate and ensure that the interests of the people come before those of the Political Party that he/she is part of.

There are 100 million first time voters in India this time. And what do they want? I was watching few TV Channels interviewing some of these first time voters....and there was a resounding blow to every politician - they were not interested in voting based on caste/religion/social background or age. They wanted to vote for someone who stood for development of the nation. Someone who will create jobs in the new economy. Someone who can bring inflation levels down. Someone who has the society in mind rather than his or her personal bank account. This was music to my ears....

The other fact that got my attention was how were political parties trying to reach out to these 100 million new voters and other younger voters in the semi-urban and urban areas. It was all about Facebook, Twitter and various other Social Media channels. Technology is all pervasive. The Political Parties not using these channels effectively were failing to communicate adequately. This was coming out clearly in the Surveys.

Various leaders in the current Congress Government have complained that the hard work done by them over the last 10 years has not been communicated well at all. In every profession, Communication is the essence and a key ingredient to success. Customers must know what has been done and what is getting done. The same is true for a Government too...in fact, more important in a democracy like India. Politicians have to go back to the voter every 5 years. So, communication is key and should be used as a strategic weapon...not a tool. The leaders who have been complaining about the lack of communication by the current Congress Government are absolutely correct. The Government has done various things but at the end of the day people judge you by the outcome. If the outcomes are higher inflation, slower growth, massive corruption and lack of decision making and combined with poor communication, then, it is a recipe for disaster. People have not heard the Prime Minister come out and speak effectively on various matters that have impacted the country over these last 5 years. This lack of communication from the Leadership of the Nation is sad.

While the punches and the counter punches are of great entertainment value, they serve more as interesting commercial breaks in a more serious drama enfolding. What people really want are bold and decisive leadership, jobs, growth of the economy, reduced prices, no corruption and lesser interference from the government in the day to day lives of the individual. I hope that the new Government is more focused on these aspects and the people of this country.

The Perfectionist

As he walked by his eye caught something that did not meet his specification. He wanted it changed. It had to be like what he had envisaged. He would not rest till it met all his requirements. His team was always worried when he walked in. They were never relaxed as something or the other would not meet his requirement. This time too they were tensed. The whole building with 2000 staff was put on high alert for his visit. They had spent weeks preparing the agenda and for the floor walks, what he would see, what the teams would tell him, etc.  They spent lots of time away from customer issues. They could never be their natural self. They just couldn't afford to make a mistake. As he walked in to office that Monday morning, his eye picked up a poster that he felt was not well formatted. Meet the perfectionist.

An organization tries to get used to the quirks of its leaders and it takes months, if not years, to undo some of these habits. I am not one of those perfectionists. When I moved in to a new role, I started by visiting various centres where we did our back office work from. Weeks before I landed in one particular centre (my first visit after I took over the role), I sent a message to the Head of that Centre as to what I would like to see and do there. I sent word that they should be themselves. I landed up there and what I heard was that the whole centre had prepared for weeks before I landed up. During that visit, I let people make and accept their mistakes. Explained to them how many mistakes I had made before coming to this position. Told them that the most important thing is to accept the mistake, rectify and move on in life. Within 18 months, I could reduce the time spent by staff preparing for my visit and more importantly they were not under pressure any more. They just tried their best and that was enough. They also knew it and so the visits became more enjoyable.

I have seen many perfectionists and while they bring tremendous strengths, they also bring with them a host of issues. These issues are sometimes very large and range from not being able to delegate, to subordinates always under pressure to the mood in the office just not being relaxed. No one is empowered to make a mistake!!! I use the word "empowered" on purpose. No one makes mistakes on purpose. And there are consequences to mistakes. However, to err is human and all of us do make mistakes. You just cannot be perfect all the times. So, there is no point thinking that we will work without making mistakes. If you do make a mistake, just rectify and move on. However, the perfectionist is unable to handle this and it causes significant problems at the workplace (and at home too).

The biggest fallout of the perfectionist is that he/she is unable to enjoy the journey of life. They keep moving from one issue to the other, struggle to delegate and though things are going fine, they are unable to sit back, relax and enjoy the journey. They agonize over everything. As Anne Wilson Schaef put it, "Perfectionism is self-abuse of the highest order."

The reason why a perfectionist struggles to delegate is that he/she wants things in a particular way only. There are no other alternatives. The perfectionist, therefore, struggles to trust someone else with the work. This really slows down the pace at which the organization moves. Agility is lost and so is trust.

Please don't mistake me, if you are one of those perfectionists. The world does need the perfectionist. You cannot do detailed oriented jobs without the perfectionist. You need someone who is worried about the quality of delivery and looks at all possible issues. You need someone who is managing risks. And all these are critical to the functioning of an organization. Just imagine a pilot telling you as you strap your seat belt, "Ladies and gentleman, we are about to take off. However, please understand that I am not a perfectionist and so am not sure how the landing will be!!!" As Barbra Streisand once said, "I've been called many names like perfectionist, difficult and obsessive. I think it takes obsession, takes searching for the details for any artist to be good."

Does this mean a perfectionist cannot head an organization? Of course not. He/she can head an organization so long as it is not really large. If it is large, there will be a struggle from various angles and it will cause more problems than solve.

Does this mean leaders should not search for perfection? My opinion is along the lines of what Salvador Dali said, "Have no fear of perfection. You will never reach it." I believe a leader has to be moderate in approach to everything he/she does. The leader has to build a team that he/she can trust and then delegate so that the organization moves very fast and is agile. I will end this post with a quote of Ashleigh Brilliant, "I am not perfect, but parts of me are excellent."

Timing your career

"I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed." Michael Jordan 

As in the life and career of Michael Jordan, everyone goes through ups and downs and these ups and downs are needed to improve and grow in life and in our careers.  As someone said, "You will never appreciate the up if you don't have a down". It is, therefore, important to understand that in a long career that will span over 30 years, it is essential to time yourself, ensure that you give yourself time to mature in a role so that you can not only learn in that role but also contribute to the organization. 

It has become a habit for people to do a role for a year or two and then move on to the next. The old saying, "A rolling stone gathers no moss" is apt here. It is essential for people to do different roles. However, it is equally important for people to mature in a role. By maturity, I mean going through different stages in that role - learning the role, understanding the impact the role has in the organization and then contributing and adding value so that the organization gets the benefit of your learning curve. This typically takes 2 to 3 years. 

It is also essential to ensure that you time yourself in your career so that you reach the top of your capacity at the appropriate time. Each one of us is born different. Not everyone can become a CEO and that is not the be all and end all of life. It is, therefore, essential to understand our individual strengths, aspirations and where we believe we want to be in life. Then use that to start timing yourself. This is easier said than done. When you start your career at 23+, it is impossible to have clarity on where you want to be when you are 60 and how you are going to get there. This is why it is important that we have a mentor and as we go up the organization, we would end up needing a coach. 

In my career that has spanned 30+ years, I have moved across industry verticals and organizations. I have done various roles but given at least 2 to 3 years in each role.  This has helped me learn in each role and also contribute in that role so that the investment the organization has made during my learning curve on the role is paid back. I have also timed myself (though unconsciously at times) to ensure that my climb has not been too fast. It is fine to climb slow but if you climb very fast, it is also noticed that you come down quite fast or possibly burn out or fail in roles because you do not have the life experience to manage the needs of the role.  Many a time, people fail because they are not able to handle a new peer set as they get promoted.

Superior technical expertise on a role is treated as being enough to do a role. This is possibly one of the biggest mistakes we make while promoting an individual or while we ask for our promotion. We mistake superior performance in a role to be potential to take on larger roles. We also mistake superior knowledge of technical aspects in a role to be enough to manage the next role. Maybe it is and maybe it is not. So, here is where care is needed. More so, if the next role is managerial in nature. As we go up from a manager to becoming a leader of large teams, then, again it is essential to see if you can measure up to the role. The role could be demanding from a sales/marketing perspective, managing large teams across geographies, etc. All these need appropriate life experiences apart from knowledge of the technical aspects of the job. I have been asked a question whether I look for grey hair or superior performance. I say both. You need to know your job and you also need the life experiences to handle senior roles. 

The time to maturity in a role and also taking one step at a time in a career helps in managing adversity well. This was the reason I started this post with Michael Jordan's quote. It is essential to be able to handle the "downs" with as much equanimity and grace as you would the "ups". Personally, I have gone through ups and downs in my career. I have failed many times before I got to where I am. As I always say, “There is no harm in failing…just ensure that you don’t repeat mistakes. More importantly, just get up, dust yourself and run again.” To be able to handle the ups and downs, it needs patience and sound judgment. These come with life experiences. As in everything else in life, these experiences come at a cost. As Cal Ripken Jr. said, "A lot of people think I had such a rosy career, but I wanted to identify that one of the things that helps you have a long career is learning how to deal with adversity, how to get past it. Once I learned how to get through that, other things didn't seem so hard."

Territories

I saw the dog playing in my garden and the first thought that came to me was, "How did this dog get in?" I then saw that our gates were open. I was reminded of something that I had read, "Does the breeze ask you your caste or religion before touching you? Does the migratory bird worry about which country's airspace it violates? Does the cloud look at which country it is floating above before dropping rain?" All these territories are man-made. The dog did not understand it at all. Funny, because even the dog marks its own territory and if anyone is anywhere near it, it will growl or bark. Despite that, this dog didn't understand any other markings.

Man made these territories so that s/he could live in peace with neighbours. But most wars have been fought over territories. Most of the tensions that we see in Asia today are again on who owns the oceans and what are territorial waters. There are issues with airspace violations. There have been instances where civilian air-crafts have been shot down for violation of airspace killing hundreds of people. So, apart from dividing up land, we divided up water and space too. And, despite marking all these territories, we seem to be at loggerheads with each other constantly.

Human behavior is amazing and varied. You also see this behavior of territory in organizations. Whilst this is an issue in all organizations, it is especially acute in large organizations. We do try and ensure that roles and responsibilities are clearly laid out. However, in large organizations, we typically notice redundant organizations, duplication of efforts and all these cause confusion on accountability. It also causes territorial issues. I have seen that typical human behavior is to make use of this confusion and actually not take accountability.  More so, if the organization is not meetings its targets.

"The business schools reward difficult complex behavior more than simple behavior, but simple behavior is more effective." Warren Buffett.  This is especially true in large organizations and more complex multi-national organizations. I have seen people wanting to "own" certain types of work or certain teams and will go to any length to get it going. To a large extent this happens when they want to increase the spend budget or revenue budget under themselves. What I have noticed is that this is done so that they can survive either at their existing level or they go and ask for a promotion stating that their accountability has increased.  This is also done at times to protect the budgets under them if some part of their organization is taken away from them due to re-organization.  The problem stems from the basic fact that the size of a role or job is measured by the Cost or Revenue that the role/job supports. So, the larger the cost or revenue under the job, the bigger will the size of the job be. Eg. if you are a Vice President, you must have $x of budget under you (either cost or revenue). If that comes down, someone will question as to why you are at the level of a VP. So, what happens if that  sizing is under threat? You will immediately try to increase it (so that you can continue to remain a VP) and that is where territorial behaviours come in. 

"Most bad behavior comes from insecurity." Debra Winger. This is so true. When the sizing of your role is under threat, you behaviours change and you want to add to the dimension of your role.  I have also seen many leaders making a grab for business lines to bring in revenue streams under them. This is more so where they are just cost centres and want to become profit centres.

Over the years, I have found that it is best to get out of this paradigm and also get your teams to get out of this paradigm. Yet, despite this, you still have to manage the Human Resources Policies that are driven by this paradigm. Why do they have this way of measurement? Because, there are not many other ways to measure a job sizing across a global organization. If you measure based on complexity, then, over a period of time, every role will become complex. This is exactly why organizations have used this measure based on cost or revenue. 

What has worked for me is to show the value that the organization drives - in terms of revenue improvement, cost reduction, profit enhancement and cash flow accretion. These are also objective measures and moves the organization towards contribution rather than costs/revenue numbers managed.

Beyond all these numbers, we need to remember that leadership is about people. It is essential for every leader to create an environment that is non-threatening. As regards this, I would come back to what I have written on many times before - being a human being and treating everyone as a human.  "The fact is that people are good, Give people affection and security, and they will give affection and be secure in their feelings and their behavior." Abraham Maslow. 

The Will to Win

There were elections in few States in India and in the Union Territory of New Delhi, a new party called the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which translates to the Common Man's Party, is the second largest party in terms of seats won. They have formed the Government with the support of another party. The party with the highest number of seats (BJP) is unable to form the government because neither do they have a majority nor the external support. One of the members of  the BJP is reported to have said that "The AAP is power hungry".

I asked myself the question as to why all these political parties contest elections. It was because they wanted to win, take charge and drive change in the society. They wanted the power to be able to change society. So, are they all not hungry for power? Yes, they are. So, then, why demean it? There is nothing wrong in being hungry for power so long as we do not do unscrupulous acts to obtain it and not misuse it once we become powerful. I believe that this hunger for power in order to drive change in the societies that we live in is the winning aspiration in politics. If this aspiration does not exist, then, there is no point in contesting elections. Anyone who participates for the sake of participation is a waste of time. What is needed is the will to win. I was reminded of Cicero, "The spirit, the will to win and will to excel are the things that endure."

Someone said, "The will to win is refusing to lose." I believe that this is required in the world that we live in. The attitude that "we will not lose". The attitude that "we can". That we will give it our best shot in order to win. That there is nothing wrong in having that winning aspiration. That we are doing a job or taking up an assignment or contesting in an election or running a race to win. Yes, it is important to enjoy the journey and to participate fairly. But, the attitude should be winning. Without that, we do not give it our best shot. As Vince Lombardi said, "Winning isn't everything, but the will to win is everything."

When we win something, we lose something else. This is life. We focus intensely on our jobs and careers, win there and take the eye of the ball on family or something else (could be our hobby). That is why we discuss work-life balance quite often. This balance depends on where the will to win is. If you want to be a great dad or mom, you focus on the child and win there. You become the best dad or mom and that, in itself, is a victory. Though we think that this is not yielding money, it could be the best investment we have ever made in our lives. A great childhood, good parenting, a well rounded child can give us much more than what many jobs can. We may end up becoming a great parent and probably not the best manager or leader in the company that we work in. It depends on the choices that we make. Whatever be the choice, we should look to not only excel but win in that choice and not feel ashamed about it.

 

Many companies lose their way in this world because they do not have the will to win and/or do not adapt that winning aspiration as the world around them changes. Yes, it is important to adapt our winning strategies as the environment around us changes. So, whilst we have the will to win, we should also have clear winning strategies and these will change as the world around us changes. It is said that of the Top 100 companies in 1900s only 16 exist now. I would say that it depends on how you look at it...most companies have been merged with others or taken over by others or taken others over and changed identity. What this shows is that most of these companies that have survived have kept on morphing and adapting their winning aspiration as the world around them changed. However, all of them had the will to win.

 

What does this mean for each one of us at an individual level? Each one of us needs to have this winning attitude. It is important to participate. It is very important to enjoy the journey. However, to be able to give it our best shot, it is important for us to have this will to win through this journey. This will to win or refusing to lose helps us build character. It makes us more resilient when we face adversity, as the journey to success is never easy. It helps us anticipate changes in the journey. It deepens our convictions and keeps us motivated. It pushes the "can do" attitude to the fore. We refuse to wilt under pressure. So long as we have this will, we motivate ourselves to keep going. The boxing champion Muhammad Ali once said “Champions aren’t made in gyms. Champions are made from something they have deep inside them - a desire, a dream, and a vision. They have to have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill.” 

 

Most importantly, the will to win pushes us towards individual excellence. It gives us the pride in ourselves and the pride in the job that we do. I sign off with a Confucius quote, "The will to win, the desire to succeed, the urge to reach your full potential... these are the keys that will unlock the door to personal excellence."

The Nervous Parent and the Confident Child

"Dad, I can handle this. Don't worry." I still remember saying this to my dad in 1984 as I left India. This was my first visit abroad and I was going to work for a chartered accounting firm. I was going away for a long time. He had come to Mumbai (from Bangalore) to send me off. I remember that it was his wedding anniversary but he had decided to come to Mumbai with me. My dad was clearly worried but I told him that I am old enough to handle this.

I was at the airport few days ago sending off my daughter to Mumbai...her first travel alone by air. Was I worried? A bit...But, then, I rewound to 1984 in my head and things settled down.  I was talking about this to a friend of mine who sent his daughter recently to the US. Her first travel alone. He told me how the connecting flight from London to Phoenix got delayed and had to land somewhere else. This meant she had to deplane, clear customs elsewhere, board another flight and reach Phoenix. Whenever she was confused, she used her smart-phone, got in to a video call with someone, cleared her doubts and made it through safely.

Is this a major problem in today's world? Absolutely not...technology has helped in a big way. However, we are all human beings...and as parents, there are anxieties despite all the technology and the assurances that our children give us. This is probably because in our mind's eye we find it difficult to see our little children grow to become adults. My mom says even today, "You may have grown up, but for me, you are still the little child."

 

I would like to take this parallel to the workplace. If people have worked with us for a long time, we find it difficult to imagine them having grown in the job and knowledge levels. So, despite us getting promoted or moving up, we struggle to see the next few levels growing up and being ready to take on more senior roles. That is why we see many leaders hiring from outside for senior positions instead of promoting from within. I have firmly believed that if a person is even 60-70% ready for a role, as leaders we should be able to take a punt and give him/her the role unless there are other issues.  We are prepared to take risks with someone who we have interviewed for an hour or more but not willing to do that with a person who has worked with us for years. This is because we know all the flaws and in our mind's eye this person has really not "grown". 

 

The other issue this behavior gives rise to is that leaders suddenly think themselves to be the "parent" equivalent. This can trigger off huge issues in an organization. I faced a situation where a team manager would land up for any social gathering individuals in his team called him to and at whatever time of day. I had heard of him turning up for weddings at 2 am!!!  However, his team felt that it was difficult working with him because he behaved like that "difficult dad" who you would dare not go against. I called him and coached him. He continued to struggle and so we had to take him out of the managerial role. However, given his domain knowledge we gave him a role of a subject matter expert. He enjoyed his new role and loved the interaction with the team, though not as its manager.

 

A leader clearly needs to avoid these pitfalls. What I have done is to measure myself on few parameters. How many of the roles falling vacant in my teams have been filled internally? Further, I have also tracked meticulously how many "Ready Now" successors we have created across all levels in the whole organization. In one of the organizations I led, we had reached a situation where we could fill a position falling vacant anywhere in the world within few hours. If we put in this rigour as leaders, we will end up with highly engaged teams.

The King is dead....Long live the King!!!

When I was in school we played inter school tournaments in various sports. The winning school would get a large trophy which they could keep for a year. The next year, the trophy went to the school that won the tournament. I asked our Coach one day, "Why cant they give a new trophy every year so that the School gets to keep it forever?" The coach told me how expensive it was to make a trophy and that's why it is handed from school to school every year. He told me something else that I remember to this day, "Ravi, the trophy is like a revolving chair. You are sitting on it now and when someone else wins, you are out and that person is sitting on the chair. It is like an old king dying and a new king taking over...The King is dead...long live the King!!!"

At work, we find leaders face this problem. They confuse themselves to be that chair rather than the person sitting on it. This results in them not knowing how to get out of the chair. It is essential not to confuse our individual self with the position that we occupy.

Over the years, I have managed to move away from getting confused on this aspect. But it took me a while. When it did happen, it was a wonderful feeling. It was like watching yourself at work as an outsider. It gave me a sense that I term as "detached attachment". I would be laser sharp focused on the job. However, I was never stuck to it. Till I had the job, I would give better than my best to it. Once I moved on, I actually moved on...there was no looking back.  This has at times made my colleagues feel that I am cold but over a period of time they have recognized that it is the best thing to do. I believe it also gets you to be professional too.

I remember that I had moved out of a role once and there was a period when the new leader took time to figure out and announce what she wanted to do. In the meanwhile, the team started getting jittery. One of them called me one day and said that others are jittery and they have started maneuvering in an attempt to please the new leader and figure out what is in her mind. I told the person that she is welcome to call me anytime but not on this topic. I told her that I have moved on and the new leader must be given a chance to succeed in her own right. The person who called was a bit upset at the beginning but after few weeks she called me and apologized. She said that she was very upset with my response but having thought about it, she felt that it was one of the most professional responses that she had ever received in her life. She felt that this was a new lesson in leadership that she had learnt. She summarized it well for me - "You are not the chair on which you sit. When you move on, give the next person the chance to take the organization to the next level from where you left it."

It is often these small things that everyone notices in leaders and learn. I know of a person who was the Managing Director of a company. He was one of the best leaders of those times in India. As he started getting closer to retirement, there was a lot of unease in him. I noticed that he was struggling to handle the fact that someday people who respected him for the position he held could possibly ignore him. The first few months after his retirement was an absolute struggle for him. If his ex-assistant did not pick the phone when he called, he thought that she was ignoring him. The last I met him was almost 10 years after his retirement. Even then, he would refer himself as the Ex-Managing Director of that company rather than just introducing himself by name. He could never come to terms with retirement. He could never see himself as an individual. He was always the MD or the Ex-MD of the company. The seat had got to him.  What I also noticed was that he would try and talk to people who had worked with him and were still there in the company to find out what was happening. He hardly had nice words to say on the new leaders. Over a period of time, he lost respect and people just avoided speaking to him.

I have always believed that our time will come. When it does, give it your best shot. Once it is done, just move on. Don't look back, except with really fond memories. Wish your successor the best in your heart of hearts....this will go a long way in helping you wean yourself away from that chair.