Blogs >> Entrepreneurship >>
Interdependent
Hierarchical System
Part of the problem is our cultural background. We’ve had feudal andhierarchical social systems, where people look at one person, asopposed to a group of people, for all the answers - the father, in thecase of the family, and the boss, in the professional world. In thissystem, whoever is senior supposedly knows best. This was fine inearlier times when knowledge and wisdom were passed on orally; but inmodern society, there is no way that one person can know everything.Today, you may find that a young computer-trained person has moreanswers for an accounting problem than a senior accountant has. Untilwe understand how best to leverage this diversity of experience, wewill not be able to create and fully utilize the right kind of teams.
In my younger days in the US, I attended an executive seminar forRockwell International, where about 25 senior company executives hadcongregated for a week of strategic discussion. In the evenings, wewould break out into five different groups of five people each. Inthose group workshops, someone would delegate tasks, saying: “You makecoffee; you take notes; you are the chairman; and you clean the board.”The next day, there would be different duties for each group member. Noone ever said, “But I made coffee twice.” I thought to myself, if thiswere happening in India, people would be saying, “But I’m the seniorsecretary - why should I make the coffee and you be the chairman?”Hierarchy comes naturally to our minds.
What Derails a Team?
Group work requires a thorough understanding of the strengths andweaknesses of individuals irrespective of their hierarchy. Because ofour background, we often don’t learn how to exercise and acceptleadership - to lead and to follow - simultaneously. Some gravitatetoward exercising leadership, and others gravitate toward accepting thelead of others. But in true teamwork, everyone needs to do both. Beinga good team player implies respect for others, tolerance of differentpoints of view and willingness to give. The ability to resolveconflicts without either egotism or sycophancy is a very importantaspect of being a team player: You have to agree to disagree.
I find that people in India somehow tend to focus on achieving totalagreement, which is almost always impossible. So before work begins,people want everyone to agree on everything. Instead, they should say,“OK. This is what we agree on, so let’s start working on this. What wedon’t agree on, we will resolve as we go along.” For things to moveforward, it’s important to work on the agreed-upon aspects and not getbogged down in the areas of disagreement.
Yet another snake that kills teamwork is people’s political agendas.You’ve got to be open, clear and honest to be a good team player. Mostpeople though, have a hidden agenda - they say something but mean theexact opposite. I call it “split-level consciousness.” To say and meanthe same thing is a very critical part of a good work ethic.
Criticizing the Individual or the Idea?
In my days at C-DoT, when there were 400 employees, I asked an Americanpsychiatrist to come to India as a consultant and give me a report onthe “psychological health of C-DoT” - something that had never beendone before in India. He spent several days in the organization andtalked to a lot of people, trying to understand the situation. Hisanalysis opened my eyes to a lot of things I did not realize becauseall my life I had worked in the US. People complained to him that SamPitroda was ruthless and criticized them in front of everyone else. Anduntil then I had thought that I was simply being open! If someone hadnot been doing well, I would tell the person directly to his face in ageneral meeting. The employees said that was insulting, and that theyshould be pulled aside individually to be told of the inefficiency. Butin today’s world, you cannot afford to do that every time. Besides, Ifigured that criticizing someone in a meeting was for the benefit ofall present, and everyone could learn from that individual’s mistakes.
It was then that I learned how Indians do not differentiate betweencriticizing an idea and criticizing an individual. So in a group, ifyou tell someone that his idea is no good, he automatically takes itpersonally and assumes that you are criticizing him. No one can have agood idea every day on every issue. If you disagree with my idea, thatdoes not mean that you have found fault with me as a person. Thus, itis perfectly acceptable for anyone to criticize the boss - but thisconcept is not a part of the Indian system. So from time to time, it isimportant for an organization’s chief executive to get a report on thepsychological health of the firm. How do people in the team feel? Arethey stable? Confident? Secure? Comfortable? These are the key elementsof a team’s success.
In India you find that bosses kick the people below them, and butter upthe people above. It should be exactly the opposite - butter up thepeople below, and don’t be afraid to kick those at the top. For a bossto be comfortable accepting criticism from subordinates, he must feelgood about himself. Self-esteem is a key prerequisite to such a systembeing successful.
Mental vs. Physical Workers
Here’s a personal story that will bring out another serious problemfacing India - the dichotomy and difference in respectability betweenphysical and mental workers which seriously affects team performance. Ihad a driver named Bhumi Ram, who I thought was one of the best driversin the world. He used to open the door for me whenever I entered orexited the car. Right in the first few days I told him, “Bhumi Rambhai, you are not going to open the door for me. You can do that if Ilose my hands.” He almost started crying. He said, “Sir, what are yousaying? This is my job!” I told him that I didn’t want to treat himlike a mere driver. He had to become a team player. I told him thatwhenever he was not driving, he should come into my office and help outwith office work - make copies, file papers, send faxes, answer phonecalls or simply read - rather than sit in the car and wait for me toshow up. Diversifying tasks increases workers’ self-esteem andmotivation and makes them team players. Now, even if I call him forwork in the middle of the night, he is ready - because I respect himfor what he does.
Team Interactions
Unfortunately, when good teams do get created, they almost invariablyfall apart. In the ‘80s, there was a great political team consisting ofRajiv Gandhi, Arun Nehru, V.P. Singh, Arun Singh and others. If thatteam had remained intact, India would have been a different countrytoday. They were all the same age, were good friends, and hadbackgrounds outside of politics. But the team self-destructed. Theydeveloped conflicts and couldn’t resolve them - and the nation paid theprice. In our system today it is very difficult to build teams becausenobody wants to be seen playing second fiddle.
It is very hard in India to find good losers. Well, you win some andyou lose some. If you lose some, you should move on! You don’t need tospend all your time and energy attacking the winner. You try harder,and perhaps next time you will win.
In India we have people of different cultural backgrounds, religions,ethnicities and caste groups - a fertile ground for diversity in theworkplace. We should actually be experts in working with diversity. Butit can only happen when we get rid of personal, caste and communityinterests.
It all changes when we are out in the US. Here, we are a smallingredient in a huge salad bowl. We are willing to compromise andaccept differences because we ourselves are different. In the US, weact as the minority. In India, we act as the majority - and we neverthink about how the minority feels in that environment.
In the US you become part of the team very easily, helped on by thegeneral environment here that encourages teamwork. People appreciategood work and pat you on the back; your boss is open and doesn’t mindcriticism - you can tell her that she’s not right and she will say,yeah, maybe you have a good idea. The young are respected; there is nohierarchical system. There could be a 40-year-old CEO with a55-year-old VP. It has nothing to do with age; capability and expertiseare what counts. But you don’t yet see these attitudes taking hold inIndia.
Managers in the US corporate environment who work with Indians - and infact, with Asians in general - need to recognize that these individualshave a tendency to feel they are not getting recognition or are notbeing respected. It must be realized that these individuals have lowerself-esteem to begin with and therefore have to be pampered andencouraged a little more because they need it. This makes them feelbetter and work better.
No Substitute for Teamwork
Teamwork is key to corporate and national governance, and to getanything done. The fundamental issues are respect for others, openness,honesty, communication, willingness to disagree, resolution ofconflict, and recognition that the larger goal of the team as a wholetrumps individual or personal agendas.
Part of the problem is our cultural background. We’ve had feudal andhierarchical social systems, where people look at one person, asopposed to a group of people, for all the answers - the father, in thecase of the family, and the boss, in the professional world. In thissystem, whoever is senior supposedly knows best. This was fine inearlier times when knowledge and wisdom were passed on orally; but inmodern society, there is no way that one person can know everything.Today, you may find that a young computer-trained person has moreanswers for an accounting problem than a senior accountant has. Untilwe understand how best to leverage this diversity of experience, wewill not be able to create and fully utilize the right kind of teams.
In my younger days in the US, I attended an executive seminar forRockwell International, where about 25 senior company executives hadcongregated for a week of strategic discussion. In the evenings, wewould break out into five different groups of five people each. Inthose group workshops, someone would delegate tasks, saying: “You makecoffee; you take notes; you are the chairman; and you clean the board.”The next day, there would be different duties for each group member. Noone ever said, “But I made coffee twice.” I thought to myself, if thiswere happening in India, people would be saying, “But I’m the seniorsecretary - why should I make the coffee and you be the chairman?”Hierarchy comes naturally to our minds.
What Derails a Team?
Group work requires a thorough understanding of the strengths andweaknesses of individuals irrespective of their hierarchy. Because ofour background, we often don’t learn how to exercise and acceptleadership - to lead and to follow - simultaneously. Some gravitatetoward exercising leadership, and others gravitate toward accepting thelead of others. But in true teamwork, everyone needs to do both. Beinga good team player implies respect for others, tolerance of differentpoints of view and willingness to give. The ability to resolveconflicts without either egotism or sycophancy is a very importantaspect of being a team player: You have to agree to disagree.
I find that people in India somehow tend to focus on achieving totalagreement, which is almost always impossible. So before work begins,people want everyone to agree on everything. Instead, they should say,“OK. This is what we agree on, so let’s start working on this. What wedon’t agree on, we will resolve as we go along.” For things to moveforward, it’s important to work on the agreed-upon aspects and not getbogged down in the areas of disagreement.
Yet another snake that kills teamwork is people’s political agendas.You’ve got to be open, clear and honest to be a good team player. Mostpeople though, have a hidden agenda - they say something but mean theexact opposite. I call it “split-level consciousness.” To say and meanthe same thing is a very critical part of a good work ethic.
Criticizing the Individual or the Idea?
In my days at C-DoT, when there were 400 employees, I asked an Americanpsychiatrist to come to India as a consultant and give me a report onthe “psychological health of C-DoT” - something that had never beendone before in India. He spent several days in the organization andtalked to a lot of people, trying to understand the situation. Hisanalysis opened my eyes to a lot of things I did not realize becauseall my life I had worked in the US. People complained to him that SamPitroda was ruthless and criticized them in front of everyone else. Anduntil then I had thought that I was simply being open! If someone hadnot been doing well, I would tell the person directly to his face in ageneral meeting. The employees said that was insulting, and that theyshould be pulled aside individually to be told of the inefficiency. Butin today’s world, you cannot afford to do that every time. Besides, Ifigured that criticizing someone in a meeting was for the benefit ofall present, and everyone could learn from that individual’s mistakes.
It was then that I learned how Indians do not differentiate betweencriticizing an idea and criticizing an individual. So in a group, ifyou tell someone that his idea is no good, he automatically takes itpersonally and assumes that you are criticizing him. No one can have agood idea every day on every issue. If you disagree with my idea, thatdoes not mean that you have found fault with me as a person. Thus, itis perfectly acceptable for anyone to criticize the boss - but thisconcept is not a part of the Indian system. So from time to time, it isimportant for an organization’s chief executive to get a report on thepsychological health of the firm. How do people in the team feel? Arethey stable? Confident? Secure? Comfortable? These are the key elementsof a team’s success.
In India you find that bosses kick the people below them, and butter upthe people above. It should be exactly the opposite - butter up thepeople below, and don’t be afraid to kick those at the top. For a bossto be comfortable accepting criticism from subordinates, he must feelgood about himself. Self-esteem is a key prerequisite to such a systembeing successful.
Mental vs. Physical Workers
Here’s a personal story that will bring out another serious problemfacing India - the dichotomy and difference in respectability betweenphysical and mental workers which seriously affects team performance. Ihad a driver named Bhumi Ram, who I thought was one of the best driversin the world. He used to open the door for me whenever I entered orexited the car. Right in the first few days I told him, “Bhumi Rambhai, you are not going to open the door for me. You can do that if Ilose my hands.” He almost started crying. He said, “Sir, what are yousaying? This is my job!” I told him that I didn’t want to treat himlike a mere driver. He had to become a team player. I told him thatwhenever he was not driving, he should come into my office and help outwith office work - make copies, file papers, send faxes, answer phonecalls or simply read - rather than sit in the car and wait for me toshow up. Diversifying tasks increases workers’ self-esteem andmotivation and makes them team players. Now, even if I call him forwork in the middle of the night, he is ready - because I respect himfor what he does.
Team Interactions
Unfortunately, when good teams do get created, they almost invariablyfall apart. In the ‘80s, there was a great political team consisting ofRajiv Gandhi, Arun Nehru, V.P. Singh, Arun Singh and others. If thatteam had remained intact, India would have been a different countrytoday. They were all the same age, were good friends, and hadbackgrounds outside of politics. But the team self-destructed. Theydeveloped conflicts and couldn’t resolve them - and the nation paid theprice. In our system today it is very difficult to build teams becausenobody wants to be seen playing second fiddle.
It is very hard in India to find good losers. Well, you win some andyou lose some. If you lose some, you should move on! You don’t need tospend all your time and energy attacking the winner. You try harder,and perhaps next time you will win.
In India we have people of different cultural backgrounds, religions,ethnicities and caste groups - a fertile ground for diversity in theworkplace. We should actually be experts in working with diversity. Butit can only happen when we get rid of personal, caste and communityinterests.
It all changes when we are out in the US. Here, we are a smallingredient in a huge salad bowl. We are willing to compromise andaccept differences because we ourselves are different. In the US, weact as the minority. In India, we act as the majority - and we neverthink about how the minority feels in that environment.
In the US you become part of the team very easily, helped on by thegeneral environment here that encourages teamwork. People appreciategood work and pat you on the back; your boss is open and doesn’t mindcriticism - you can tell her that she’s not right and she will say,yeah, maybe you have a good idea. The young are respected; there is nohierarchical system. There could be a 40-year-old CEO with a55-year-old VP. It has nothing to do with age; capability and expertiseare what counts. But you don’t yet see these attitudes taking hold inIndia.
Managers in the US corporate environment who work with Indians - and infact, with Asians in general - need to recognize that these individualshave a tendency to feel they are not getting recognition or are notbeing respected. It must be realized that these individuals have lowerself-esteem to begin with and therefore have to be pampered andencouraged a little more because they need it. This makes them feelbetter and work better.
No Substitute for Teamwork
Teamwork is key to corporate and national governance, and to getanything done. The fundamental issues are respect for others, openness,honesty, communication, willingness to disagree, resolution ofconflict, and recognition that the larger goal of the team as a wholetrumps individual or personal agendas.
|
|
