Talent, Resources, Human Capital  – well, you can use any fancy term you wish to, but a Labour Court in Chennai recently held that a Senior Service Programmer of HCL Technologies was a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act – period.

While the company argued that the software engineer was in a supervisory position and on that count did not fall under the purview of Labour laws, the court did not agree.

“It cannot be denied that the job of an engineer in a software company involves skills and technical knowledge. Therefore, it can be easily concluded that the job of a software engineer can be termed as skilled or technical one,” said first additional labour court presiding officer S Nambirajan.

Rejecting the company’s objections, the judge said the software engineer was indeed a workman. According to the Industrial Disputes Act, “workman” means any person employed in any industry doing any manual unskilled, skilled, technical, operational, clerical, or supervisory work, for hire or reward, whether the terms of employment be express or implied.

His order read: “The Company has not produced any evidence to show that failure to improve the performance or failure to measure up to the expectations or standing orders of the company would amount to an act of misconduct. It is not known whether the company has any service rules and regulations, and it has not produced any materials to show what acts constitute misconduct.”

This is not the first instance in which a court has held that IT engineers are workmen. In January 2015 the Madras high court restrained software major TCS from retrenching an employee who had been issued termination orders by the company. The employee moved the high court saying the retrenchment move was illegal and in gross violation of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Admitting her petition, Justice M Duraiswamy granted a four-week interim injunction restraining the company from retrenching her.

In her petition, the employee said she was a ‘workman’ within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as her main duties and responsibilities are technical and clerical in nature.

Well, the hard reality is that the IT industry in India which recorded revenues of USD 146 billion in FY 2015 with exports slated to reach USD 98.5 Billion and a workforce of 3.5 million, is not governed by any national labour legislation except the local Shops and Commercial Establishments Act!

 A few attempts by the Government of Karnataka around the year 2012 to bring the industry under the purview of the Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act was given up with the Government finally granting it exemption for another five years effective January 2014.

 So, with no sensible legal framework in place to guide employers and protect employees, we are beginning to see a series of individual such cases springing up to set precedence for more and more likely to come in the coming days.

 All major and significant industries in India are covered under an industry specific legislation. So, factories are covered under the Factories Act, plantations under the Plantations Labour Act, mines under the Mines Act, port workers under the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, construction workers under the Building & Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment & Conditions of Service) Act, and so on.

 The Shops and Commercial Establishments Act which was really intended to address the needs of small units of establishments like a retail shop or trading establishment, a bank, an office or a hotel, restaurant, a cinema or any other place of public entertainment is hardly the right legislation to cover the IT industry.

 For an industry with such great talent and such a huge equity with the Government and all other stakeholders, it should not be too difficult a task to come up with a world-class legal framework.

Such a framework should cover the obvious areas like working conditions. It should also cover the contentious issues relating to grievance redressal, termination and disciplinary procedures. Most certainly, industry should be empowered to terminate employees with due notice should there be a need.

 I believe that a sensible legislation will only further enhance the image and stature of the industry. Since the big firms are supposedly doing better than the law, complying with it should not be difficult for them, just as the hundreds of large and reputed manufacturing companies in our country seldom have trouble complying with the various stringent Acts that apply to them. It might make them more competitive and prevent the less credible sweat shops from setting up and running IT businesses.

 I really hope that the current court rulings serve as wake up calls for stakeholders to come up with a proactive solution to deal with what I see as a potentially explosive situation.

 I am sure we all remember those wonderful words from Eliza Doolittle: “You see, really and truly, apart from the things anyone can pick up (the dressing and the proper way of speaking, and so on), the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she’s treated. I shall always be a flower girl to Professor Higgins, because he always treats me as a flower girl, and always will; but I know I can be a lady to you, because you always treat me as a lady, and always will.”

 So, we can call those millions of human beings who work on software as talent and call our work as talent acquisition and development and engagement and transformation and live in a mythical world, but finally, how we treat them in letter and spirit is what really counts.

Several years ago, I suffered from a bad back and after much effort found great relief from consulting a highly regarded homeopath. I was so impressed with his treatment that I referred several back pain patients to him. When I met him a few years later, he thanked me for the referrals but also told me in jest, “Mr. Ganesh, Just for your information, I also treat other ailments”.

What was true for this homeopathic doctor is true for executive coaches too. A lot of popular literature and articles often focus excessively on the role that coaches play in helping their coachees “behave themselves”. In reality, coaches do other things too and it is important that we don’t end up creating the impression among sponsors, coachees and prospective coaches that coaching is used predominantly to correct bad leadership behaviours.

Let’s now get back to understanding what I mean by bad behaviour. Bad behaviour is often associated with lack of emotional regulation and stress tolerance. It is associated typically with Alpha Male executives with an obnoxious style or super competent but emotional unintelligent specialists who are often referred to in a derogatory manner as “brilliant jerks” or even worse a set of senior executives who display what are often called the dark triad personality traits: machiavellianism (a manipulative attitude), narcissism (excessive self-love) and psychopathy (lack of empathy).

Leaders who display such lack of emotional regulation and cause harm to others and themselves needs attention and are often referred to for coaching within organisations. While some of them might actually benefit from therapy, I find that at least in India, it seems more socially acceptable to refer them to a coach. While behavioural coaching or the genre of coaching which focusses almost entirely on working on behavioural changes is an important part of coaching work, I must say that executive coaching is far wider and broader in its impact and purport than just getting people to behave themselves. A much less “remedial” and a much balanced and broader “developmental” view to the power and value of coaching is likely to help put to rest the popular myth that coaching is only for people who have serious behavioural problems and is often one step away from being shown the door.

So, what do sponsors use coaching for, you might ask? Based on my role of being a coach provider for well over a decade and overseeing hundreds of coaching engagements, I have found that sponsoring organisations tend to leverage executive coaching in three contexts or for three reasons:

1.     To groom and prepare an executive for a future set of roles and higher responsibilities

2.     To help an executive become far more effective in his or her current role

3.     To help executives manage their transitions in their roles effectively.

In addition to these three broad agendas that are important for the sponsor, coachees of course bring to the coaching engagement their emerging agendas from their executive or personal lives and seek the support of the coach in whom they have found a trusted helper, in gaining clarity or resolving dilemmas or taking decisions.

In each of these three contexts, we are likely to find coachees who have some immediate problems to solve as well as some future focused aspirations or potential to develop.

Across these three contexts, to help coachees solve problems or leverage potential, they may need to develop skills, revisit their styles, gain new perspectives and pay attention to strengthening certain functional and leadership competencies.

As you can see, coaches have the opportunity to contribute across a much larger plane and across a broader array of needs beyond behavioral changes that are remedial.

Having said all this, I must add that all coaching interventions across all contexts will call for the coachee to make certain fundamental behavioural changes. Without change, no development will be possible. However, such behavioural changes can be positive and developmental and is different from correcting bad behaviour.

The Indian context

This distinction is best understood when we look at coaching in the Indian context.

One of the important drivers of demand for coaching is the sheer size and complexity of many of the emerging leadership roles in functional or business domains. Many entrepreneurs and leaders have never before managed roles with this level of accountability and complexity at such a young age. 

Leaders are expected to remain innovative and flexible in the face of deeper, faster and more frequent economic cycles, constant and disruptive technological changes and frequent geopolitical tensions. They are also leading a workforce that has rapidly changing socio-cultural values, needs and preferences. Add to this our cultural context and you see the emergence of a unique set of coaching needs.

For example, a lot of coaching needs for senior executives revolves around enhancing self-esteem and confidence, become more assertive and learning to say no, delegating more effectively by holding on to one’s role boundary, developing a much more formal process based leadership style or present oneself well and display executive presence or thinking and acting strategically.  

Effective transition is yet another driver for executive coaching in India. Given the shortage of leaders many organisations prefer to grow their leaders from within. Leaders making such steep internal movements need help to even understand what the transition actually means and get the support to actually make the transition. The most typical transition needs include developing a more effective delegation style, managing a complex web of stakeholders, learning new domains, developing the ability to think strategically and see the big picture, developing the ability to respect and lead other functions, giving up one’s functional loyalty and developing the ability to engage in developmental relationships to nurture talent.

Add to this the problem of missed developmental milestones which is quite unique to India. Generations of Indians have grown within corporate ranks based on their sheer intelligence, ambition and diligence but without some of the fundamental life skills that are expected to be acquired early in life. As a result we find that organisations are filled with leaders who have moved several notches up the hierarchy while carrying the organisational equivalent of academic arrears or backlog in the form of competence deficits and gaps not just from the previous work level but often from several levels below.

So, it is not uncommon to find that a functionally competent senior executive has a need to develop his spoken communication skills, or has to learn to influence, or make decisions with firmness and so on.

So, as you can see, the Indian context presents a unique set of needs as far as coaching is concerned. Add to this the preference for executives to work with a coach who is mentor-like in his or her stature, wisdom and demeanor and you have a rather unique bouquet of possibilities for a coach which goes well beyond getting people to behave themselves.

I became a certified coach in the year 2001 – that is almost 20 years ago. From a time when we had to evangelize the primacy and benefits of coaching, we are now seeing more and more seasoned professionals embrace coaching as a fulfilling career and more and more organisations embracing coaching and preparing the ground for its meaningful application. 

As I look at the current state and the days ahead, I am convinced that it is all coming together to create an unbeatably strong and positive trend for the future. I am convinced that 2020 will be the decade of coaching. If you are a coach who has what it takes to deliver value, rejoice – this decade belongs to you!

A decade when coaching will not be sold but bought; a decade when coaching will be consumed not because there are coaches but because it works.

Here are eight strong reasons for my huge sense of optimism about the decade belonging to coaching and coaches.

1.      The rise of talent management as a function and the separation of leadership development from learning & development have taken coaching closer to business leaders and their decision making process and away from calendar based training. That means, business leaders are leveraging coaching to solve leadership needs and opportunities with business implications.

2.      Coaching as a strong option within long-term leadership development programs has helped coaching earn its rightful place among reliable developmental experiences. While class room training has long existed alongside action learning options, coaching has come in as a breath of fresh air and is holding out great possibilities for bespoke learning and change.

3.      Increasingly, Boards and CEOs are beginning to place as much emphasis on means as they are on ends. They are waking up to the reality that the right leadership behaviours are as important as the best business outcomes and leaders having challenges with that are being encouraged to seek help.

4.      More and more Boards, Business leaders and Venture investors recognize that given their closeness to the business and their emotional involvement, it is best to give their CEOs access to a coach to grapple with their emerging executive agendas. Support from an outside professional who has the clarity of distance seems well accepted. Books like the Trillion Dollar Coach have just nailed it!

5.      From a socio-cultural perspective the average family has had a far higher level of collective experience and acceptance of seeking help in one form or the other. Kids in schools have a counsellor, teenagers are happy to meet one or have one for help. Elders are constantly counselled by professionals about self-care. The word coaching has deeply penetrated our everyday language and relationships and therefore stigma is slowly but surely fading away.

6.      We also live a world and time of contradictions – at one level, more and more people are WOKE – are moved by social issues and display compassion empathy. At another level, we have failed or forgotten to display rudimentary emotive empathy to people just around us. So, people will be pushed to “buy listening” from a range of helpers going forward.

7.      There are enough positive stories about coaching and related forms of help making a difference. The positive buzz is strong. Those who have benefitted will be the greatest evangelists and propagators of coaching.

8.      Changing business models and labour market structures have enhanced the primacy of the individual over the large corporate. The individual is beginning to recognize that it is up to her or him to do what is needed. More and more individuals are now taking charge of their health, their finances, their diet, their leisure, their grooming and of course their development and business after business is being created to make these individual choices possible and workable. Coaching now joins the long list of services that are now within the reach of individuals and most importantly, individual will soon be ready to pay for it.

For these and perhaps other reasons, Coaching is centre stage and will thrive, when delivered well.

So, what are the trends I foresee as far as coaching is concerned? Here are a few that come to my mind.

1.      From a ubiquitous and one size fits all practice, significant specialization and applied offerings will emerge to address varied needs and contexts. The format, the durations and the applications will be limited by the imagination of providers.

2.      From being tentative and somewhat unsure, HR will reach a place where they will be able to help businesses make well informed decision about coaching. These will be supported by sound internal processes to institutionalize the use of coaching.

3.      Coaching will earn the distinction of requiring the highest level of involvement as far as the sponsor is concerned. Unlike training, coaching will require sponsors to play a hugely active and supportive role and that will make coaching a hugely educative experience for sponsors. Thanks to coaching, sponsors will be far better informed about how people learn and change.

4.       Team coaching will evolve as a natural extension of individual coaching. This will require coaches to master not just coaching competencies but also group facilitation skills – the interplay of OD and coaching.

5.      Coaching will become a critical managerial and leadership competence. As a result, creating a coaching culture and embedding coaching into all conversations and relationships at work will become important.

6.      Of course, as with any profession that sees proliferation, concerns about quality and inappropriate application and ethical transgressions will remain.

7.      For coaches to be successful, they will need to overlay their foundational coaching competencies with additional skills to address special needs. There will be iconic coaches with a hugely successful track record and reputation and there will also be coaches who will struggle to find meaningful work. This decade will see the growing importance of competence over credentials.

In summary, I think that any leader who is open to seeking help will get help and will no longer have to struggle and suffer in isolation.  That will help individuals, their families and of course their businesses do better.

It will also be a great time for coaches who have got it right.

I recently went to meet a client to discuss progress on the mentoring engagements we had set up for his two son.   A common friend happened to be there in the room at that time.  I was waiting for the common friend to leave before we could start discussing the subject.  To my surprise the client said, “There are no secrets, he knows my son too” and started discussing progress with the mentoring engagement in his presence. Some candor I thought.

I was shortlisting photographers for my daughter’s weeding recently.  When I asked them to show me samples of their work they were all excited about showing me what they called candid photos and videos (the bride and groom in exotic locales, posing for the camera in true Bollywood style).  I was particularly embarrassed to see some of the samples.  It was just too candid.

At our coaching foundation we go to great lengths to train our coaches on how they should create a trusting environment so that their coachees will open up and speak with candour. We overemphasize the importance of trust and empathic presence. When our coachees report back their progress almost all of them tell us how surprised they were by the candor with which their clients started sharing with them intimate details in the very first meeting almost as if they have known them for years. It was as if they were waiting to pour out and be heard, empathic presence or not!

Turn to organisations and you realise that from a time when appraisals where confidential we now have an overdose of assessments of individuals in all forms with very little to for the executive to hide.

The amount of candor we see in the social media of course needs no belaboring.  

As I think about this, I seem to believe that we are in the midst of what I call a candid generation where the lines between what is discreet, confidential, private, public, broadcast-worthy or open are all blurred. There is little to read between the lines or imagine or surmise.

While a lot has been said about the perils of such over exposure, I see quite a few benefits coming out of this.  

With a far higher propensity to share, talk and discuss, I am hoping that people’s willingness to seek help when they need it, especially when they are in psychologically troubled zones will be much higher and the stigma attached to those efforts will come down. So, hopefully, people will get help sooner than later and that is very good.

In organisations, leaders and managers will be held increasingly accountable for changing some of their dysfunctional behaviours and habits.  The public accountability mechanisms that will be trigged through increasing levels of feedback and other forms of candor will make it hard for people to get away by not changing. In fact, I see many leaders sharing their 360 degree feedback reports, announcing their development plans and presenting their coaches to their teams. Such acts of voluntary public accountability augurs very well for real change.

There will also be increasing pressure on individuals and organisations to be more transparent and candid about policies, practices and decisions. In any case, the CEO is evaluated by scores of people in the public domain every single day!

With a lot more candour and openness, our ability to work across cultures will certainly get better. Things will get a lot more low context.

As I begin to think about it, the possibilities seem exciting.

What do you think?

I am with a team of managers in a workshop and the subject of discussion is “having conversations with your team members”.

The managers agree that they will have conversations with their team members. But then they want a template from me for that. What questions should I ask? What should I tell them when I invite them for a discussion? Can you give us a template please?

I am talking to an HR Manager about his writing an approach paper to his Manager about a new initiative. After listening to me he asks, “Can you give me a template?”

I have been visiting this salon for my hair cut for well over three years.  The same receptionist has been booking my appointment and greeting me everytime I arrive. But she does not remember my name and asks for my mobile number every single time. Unable to hold myself, I asked her why she was finding it so hard to recognise me or remember my name. Her innocent and spontaneous answer was, “Sir, all your details are in the system”.

If you ask anyone today to write, to document, to present anything they are likely to ask you for a template.

Why have we become a template generation?

Why is it that no one wants to think, to apply their mind and struggle a little bit and create something on their own and of course make a few mistakes?

Well the most obvious culprit who stole an entire generation of cognitive abilities is the computer and all its easy to use software.

You want to write a letter, craft a CV, create a presentation or do any cognitive task of the lowest level of difficulty, there is always a template to help. Sure, template have their value but at a price.

The next big culprit is the organisation that had ambitions of scaling at low cost and therefore saw the need to de-skill jobs, create reusable tools and templates.  Sure, it helped achieve scale and standardisation but at the cost of stealing an entire generation for the need to flex their thinking muscles.

Then of course we have the World Wide Web. It holds answers to anything in the world including of course templates for everything in life.

The fact that one can access a template to perform any task calling for even the smallest level of cognitive ability allows people to engage with those tasks with minimum attention. On the other hand, because one has templates for everything, one can easily multitask as one engages with these tasks – one can text, listen to music, chat and even eat.  

What templates have robbed us of is not just the need to think but also the spirit of inquiry, the joy of researching something, the warmth of connecting with others to discover, dialogue and create something new.

Templates have also robbed people of their ability to be original, to create, to stand out.

Templates have also led people to believe that all answers lie outside of them.   

The culture of templatisation does imply that a few people will do all the thinking and all others will simply act. Perhaps there is an assumption that it is inefficient for so many people (especially in an organisation) to think.

Unfortunately, the very same organisations that popularise templates also ask their employees to be innovative.  Unfortunately, these employees struggle to innovate and hope you will give them a template for that!

Reading Swamispeak in this morning’s The Economic Times provoked me to ask this question to myself: Does appreciating and amplifying the positive work for a nation as much as it works for individuals, groups and organisation?

To share my answer to this rhetorical question, I will need to take a short detour and talk about Appreciative Inquiry (AI) as a method and a fast emerging movement.

(David Cooperrider, Suresh Srivastava, Frank Barrett, John Carter and others developed the theory and AI method and approach at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio in the 70’s.)

AI as a methodology and philosophy works on the assumption that whatever you want more of, already exists in all organisations.

While traditional problem solving processes tend to look for what is broken, what is wrong, where decay is, AI looks for what is working, where is success, where are best practices, where are the great learnings and so on. AI really looks for what is giving life, what is at the very core. Most importantly, while traditional approaches lead us back to status quo, AI hold the promise of transformational change.

Some of the assumptions of AI are that:

1. In every society, organisation or group something works. Discovering that is the starting point of change.
2. What we focus on becomes our reality. We can focus on decay and failures, or we can focus on what is working.
3. The truth is that there are multiple realities.
4. People have more confidence and comfort to journey to the future (the unknown) when they carry forward parts of the past (the known), especially those parts of the past that are confidence inducing.
5. Our language creates our reality.

 Now back to Swamispeak and what I read today.  It was in many ways a celebration of 25 years of liberalisation and what we have achieved in these 25 years.

It was so inspiring and energising for me personally.

This positive image of our nation and what I have been part of is what gives me hope, optimism about the future and fuels me to move forward.

Sure, there are ills, there is decay and there are things we can deplore but choosing to focus on what is working and then dreaming and envisioning an even greater future works far better. It has worked for me, it has worked for the scores of organisations where I have used the methodology and I have no reason to believe that it cannot work for a nation.

Only when we learn to appreciate “what is” and our language reflects that positive orientation will the world around also appreciate and respect us as a nation and as a race, I believe.

Positive Psychology as a science also says the same thing.  Our knowledge about psychology can be used to list and call out all that ails human beings – give them labels of being psychotic, neurotic and so on. We can also use the science and our knowledge to list out all that is good with human beings and ourselves – our virtues and character strengths and how we can use that goodness to actualise and be happy.

 I certainly believe that by amplifying what works and what is giving life and what our character strengths are, we can certainly create the future that we desire.  This is not some feel good stuff. This is science.

Finally, if volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity are the much talked about ingredients of the way the world is and will be, it is only by embracing and creating an appreciative and positive image can our employees walk with us into the future ahead. That is clearly the most important job of and competence for every leader today.

VUCA is passé. Disruption is the new buzz word. The coolest thing to do is to disrupt someone or something!

It is most cool if what you do can disrupt HR! First, HR outsourcing was the big disruption. That was followed by learning on the go. Then came along mobile apps in HR. Not to forget scrapping the bell curve. Well, that was not enough. Some suggested that HR be merged with Finance and someone else suggested that they blow HR up. Now all that does not still seem to be good enough. The next big disruption is to BOTify HR. (a term I am using to the process of getting BOTs to do what humans in HR did). It is predicted that BOTs will take over a lot of HR work and that millions of HR jobs will be lost all over the world to BOTs. (millions of jobs being lost is a true testimony to real disruption!)

It is envisioned that employees will engage with chatbots for everything from selection interviews to performance reviews to applying for leave to keeping them happy. Wow, that would be the day.

As I listen to and read about all these predictions and disruptive ideas, four thoughts come up in my mind.

What qualifies as HR work: A lot of what has been outsourced in HR so far or what is expected to be BOTified is not want I would call HR work. All of these are employee services of an operational and administrative nature which were at one time performed by clerical staff within the HR function. So, if BOTs will take away all the remaining operational and administrative service tasks – like sharing the same information a thousand times with a smile, then it is actually a very good thing.  Maybe many of the jobs in HR shared services might be lost. All this is good because in the first place, these do not qualify as HR work. Even more important, BOTs might do a better job.

Job design in HR: As I talk to hundreds of young HR people, all of them tell me that they experience a huge disconnect between what they thought they would do in HR and what they are actually doing. In the interest of scale and process orientation, the jobs of many front line HR professionals have been shorn of task variety, intellectual challenge, a sense of fulfilment and any form of identity. Many also experience a sense of meaninglessness in what they do and as a result, they may not end up not doing a great job of it. So, if BOTs can take the mundane and the routine out of their work and make their job a bit more enriched, that would be great. So, BOTs are most welcome.

Employees don’t want to talk to HR: There is a fear that employees may miss talking to a human being and things will get dehumanised with BOTs around. Not really. A very large number of employees do not want to talk to anyone in HR even today. In fact, if an employee does not need to talk to anyone in HR, it is a good sign that everything is working the way it should be. On the contrary, in today’s context, if someone from HR wants to talk to an employee, the employee may only get anxious. It is not different from the way we conduct our everyday business transactions through a machine or a phone or app and prefer not having to talk to anyone. So, instead of going to a self-service portal or using an app, if an employee feels comfortable talking to a BOT, that’s great.

 Better expectation management: When employees interact with HR professionals, their expectations might often be of instant solutions, a yes to all that they ask, a display of great competence, consistent responsiveness, empathy enough to understand their needs and the ability to show flexibility and responsiveness to solve their problems. When all or some of this does not happen (as is often the case), there is a huge sense of disappointment. It is my hope that when employees engage with BOTs and the BOT says I don’t know, or I can’t do, maybe employees would be more forgiving. The BOT might in fact do a better job of saying no. The BOT may also not have its own need for motivation and fair treatment and even more importantly, not have conflicts with the views and polices and values of top management. So, you see, there might actually be several clever benefits of deploying BOTs to do some of the HR work!

It is my view that in the years to come, there will be far fewer people doing real HR work. A lot of what we misperceive or call as HR work today, will not be done by HR folks and that will be a great thing if it does happen.

So, BOTs, a warm welcome!

An empathetic Board? Does that sound like an oxymoron?

As an executive coach and Consultant I have the opportunity to sit on Boards, present to Boards, be invited to Board meetings and more than anything else, listen to the experiences of many of my clients (founders and CEOs) who frequently attend Board meetings. These interactions have led me to ask myself this question – would it not be wonderful if Boards were empathetic? Will such empathy not make a difference to the executives, their performance and the business?

Am I being too idealistic and out of touch with the hard realities of corporate governance? Well blogs are really a space for asking difficult questions and for pushing the boundaries of what we think is doable. So, here I go!

In addition to the hygiene aspects of ensuring compliance and preventing any form of errors of omission and commission, I believe that Board are ultimately meant to add value, contribute to taking the business and the organisation forward and above all make each meeting a truly educative experience for the members of the management present there – the CEO and his or her team.

So, why do Boards need empathy?

Boards and Board members make their impact and difference essentially through their meetings and interactions. It is therefore fair to say that Boards are nothing but a series of interconnected powerful conversations.

If Board members are expected to use their conversation skills to challenge and encourage CEOs into higher levels of performance, the pathway to such challenge is through inspiration and empathy. To challenge successfully, they will need to show warmth and empathise first – listen, understand and confirm understanding and on that basis unearth blind spots, present new perspectives, new ways of looking at things, new points of views and so on.

Without empathy, the efforts of Board members to engage in a great conversation which includes a fair amount of challenge will be met with a lot of defensiveness and resistance.

In summary if Boards are networks of powerful conversations, empathy is an essential and necessary (but obviously not sufficient) ingredient in such conversations.

 What can inhibit empathy?

While I do not have research based evidence to argue if empathy is indeed present or not (and you might be in a better position to ask that of yourself!), I can present reasons for why it might often be missing.

In the minds of the most senior executives including the CEO, the Board is associated with a lot of power and is therefore seen as a hallowed space and accorded the highest level of importance and even reverence. In my experience, such power distance does not augur well for empathy and great conversations. The onus is on the Board to downplay the power and accentuate the relatedness.

Stereotypes about Boards and past experiences with Board members may evoke feelings of fear, anxiety and in some cases even animosity. Of course there are many Boards that inspire.The kind of emotions that are evoked will determine the propensity to change.

The physical setting for Board meetings may not at times promote empathetic presence. Most board rooms are staid, cold, heavy and formal, making the situation look grave even to the most optimistic CEO or executive. Add to this the air of formality and structure and empathetic presence becomes really hard.

Then of course comes the quality of the Board members’ presence?  Are they able to give the time that is needed for each interaction and conversation? Or are they hopping from one Board meeting to another?

Then comes their style  – do they take the time to understand the business and the executive and show their interest by asking good questions and learning  or do they want to don their executive hats and judge the Executives about what they did and what they ought to have done? Do they want to give the executive constructive feedback or just a piece of their mind? Do they seem self-assured or do they want to compete with other members to look good? Do they seem to be in a hurry to say something smart based on anecdotal evidence or would they rather listen intently?

Finally, what is the quality of the relationship between the Board members and the Board members and the executives?      Is there mutual respect, an air of genuineness, an air of openness and desire to help?

You see. There is a lot that can inhibit empathy in a Board meeting.

When I meet founders and executives who have a great Board, I can see that they are excited and motivated. They are inclined to speak the truth, show their vulnerability and see Board meetings as educative experiences.  

On the other hand, when I meet founders and executives who do not like their Board, they are so stressed at the thought of the next meeting.

To me, the plea for empathy is the journey of governance from the gross to the subtle.

I am sure there are places where this exists. What do you think?

“Yesterday I was, tomorrow I will be, but only here and now I am” – Human Angels

A few years back I had the privilege of being invited for a workshop to reflect on emerging trends in HR. It was a very different experience because of the format, the blend of formal and informal moderation and more importantly the pre-workshop preparation done to get all participants on the same page. One had a similar experience earlier with another such workshop on Employee Relations. Why am I mentioning these workshops ‘here and now’? They were facilitated by Ganesh and Harish, who along with VJ Rao have authored the book “HR – Here and Now”. The book is a rich distillation of many such interventions that the three authors have anchored and experienced.

Few months back, I first got to hear about this book when they were collating organizational experiences. Having known all three of them, I am not at all surprised at the narrative style adopted by them – a style that reminded me of Rahul Dravid known for his understated elegance, sharp cricketing brain, effectiveness not only on field, but also off field, nurturing some of the finest young cricketers.

There is something refreshing, something ‘hatke’ in the book, different from many others that I have read in the recent past. And I was wondering why I was getting that feeling – was it a bias of having known the authors, or was it the fact that I could manage reading the book within 24 hrs? I realized later that I felt so because of my alignment with the thoughts expressed, a sense of relatedness with the different contexts and aspects covered, a sense of honesty in upfronting all issues however sensitive they may be, but most importantly, deep down it felt ‘this is all about India and Indian HR’.

Why did I feel so? The answer literally lies in and between the cover pages. Let us look at the cover pages itself to start with. At a time when the trend is to talk of the future, they have opted to look at the ‘here and now’. When the trend is to showcase a macho business oriented HR function, they have chosen to highlight the ‘people champion’. I mentioned about Rahul Dravid earlier – a quintessential people champion. The back page in a way brings out the reason why the content of the book is both reflective and at the same time a practitioner’s guide. To me the book not only aptly answers all the questions listed, but more importantly also answers the question “why does HR as a function evoke such strong and varied emotions amongst people?”

All that one needs to do is to visualize being in a coaching conversation with the authors as you move from page to page, chapter to chapter.

The seven chapters reminded me of ‘7 habits of highly effective people’. Each of the 7 chapters captures the core of an effective HR function. They are written in a manner that any HR professional or people leader can relate to. Books tend to be very heavy for young professionals or too simplistic for experienced professionals. The authors have navigated this challenge very deftly and retained a universal appeal.

So what makes me connect with the book?

·        I felt involved as both positive and negative moments of my 30 years of professional journey started flashing by. The reading therefore became a two way process and I experienced a ‘flow’, similar to what Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi defines.

·        Most of us have been brought up on 2×2 grids. The authors do not disappoint and two such grids, one based on centrality and helpfulness, and the other based on task demands and business preferences, serve as anchors for all subsequent chapters.

·        The thematic approach to deal with all facets of HR gives a ‘story-telling’ feel, taking us on a smooth journey, rather than a gush of a T20 – more as cricket commentators say ‘play session by session’. The theme ‘Doing, Thinking, Feeling’ reminded me of Myer Briggs Type Indicator that was very common sometime back. How CEOs’ perceptions of HR get shaped by their own early experiences of ‘Moments of Truth’ with HR and their ‘Frames of Reference’ was an eye opener and made me wonder how the choice we make in responding to a query can have a life lasting impact for the profession at large. No wonder Stephen Covey said ‘Moment of choice is a moment of truth’. Another interesting theme covered is ‘Spectrum of Relationships’, which could have been elaborated further. The Brakes India case was a very fresh perspective and an example of thinking out of the box.

·        A challenge that one sees in today’s context is the ability to link theory to practice. The authors have deftly weaved the same in their narration, be it the timeless Maslow’s hierarchy or Herzberg’s two factor theory or the late 50s work of Michael Young or the more recent studies like WorldatWork Rewards Model or Eliott Jaques Stratified Systems Theory.

·        The cinematic start with the serial ‘The Eye of the Beholder’ remains a continued underlying part of the narrative, and the authors go on to suggest that the HR response had and will have to turn to other allied fields as well as its own scientific origins for insights and wisdom. This is also highlighted to a certain extent under ‘professional origins and influences’. The authors end also with a cinematic reference to Auguste Gusteau in the movie Ratotouille.

·        As you move from one chapter to another, from theme to theme, not knowing what lays in store, came a wow moment for me. It came because I felt that a topic not discussed so intensely would surely have not been covered even here, and then it just pops up on your face in the next theme. That wow moment was when I finished reading the theme ‘Money and Beyond’. Lo and behold the next theme of ‘Moment of Truth’ discussed the whole topic of service orientation.

·        It was heartening to see that focus on Employee Relations was not lost and figured amongst the seven specializations in HR. The tenets of ER got discussed as one of the themes, but the context was really laid out in the theme on ‘Boundaries Redefined’. Coming towards the end of the book, to me it was like a delicious dessert at the end of a seven course meal. I would have however preferred it to be part of the main course, but maybe then the flow would have got impacted.

 370 pages may not do justice to a combined experience of almost a century. In their quest to strengthen the HR profession, this book is just one more glorious test match that the authors have played leading their profession to victory. Just like we keep referring to epic innings of cricketers, this book will serve as a good reference for HR professionals of all vintages.

“Mindfulness is not a mechanical process. It is developing a very gentle, kind and creative awareness to the present moment” said Amit Ray. The authors have similarly traversed the path to create the here and now for a promising future. As Soulla Christodoulou said “You have to focus on the here and now. The future will work out itself”.

 Prabhakar Lingareddy is Vice President – Human Resources at ITC Limited’s Agri-business. He was on the National Board of NHRD from 2007 to 2014. Prabhakar is an engineer from NIT and an alumnus of XLRI, Jamshedpur.

This book review was originally published in the July 2018 edition of the NHRD Journal.

I worked for a global corporation where this interesting phrase was used quite often.

It was like this – there would be a bright executive who would launch a grand new product or service with great fanfare and flair. Much would be written about it, a lot would be spent and the initial burst of enthusiasm and euphoria which lasted a couple of years would be enough to lift not just the spirits of the organisation but also the career of the lead executive, the start-up hero. The start-up hero would be promoted and sent to a foreign land of choice.

Another year down the road, the auditors and accountants would wake up and and discover a lot of not so flattering things about the erstwhile start-up idea. A search would be put out internally for a competent and tough executive to clean things up. Enters into the scene the new executive – he works relentlessly to do the reconciliations and write offs and in a couple of years, yes – would have done enough to lift not just the spirits but also the career of the lead executive,   the clean-up hero. The clean-up hero would also be promoted and sent to a foreign land of choice.

Good for the start-up hero. Good for the clean-up hero too. Of course, not very good for the organisation.

Think of it and you realise that in the drama of business, there is a place and time for start-up heros and a place and time for clean-up heros.

Start-up heros do what they are supposed to do – bring a huge burst of energy and enthusiasm, rally people around an untested and often crazy idea, take some huge risks, scan the environment for resources, breed a lot of creativity, dream and think big, worry less about execution and more about creating a market and so on.

By their very nature, start-up heros are impatient with details, scorn at people who talk about things like stability, order, process, planning, research and so on.

They tend to be charming, persuasive and unbelievably optimistic. They hate to talk about controls, process, profitability and so on.

Clean-up heros do what they are supposed to do – they evaluate, they control, they review, they look at the organisation’s ability to implement, they look for what can go wrong, they pour cold water over crazy ideas, they frame policies, they audit, they measure effectiveness and so on.

By their very nature, clean-up heros are detail oriented, they are planful, work through processes and seek stability. They often tend to be boring, pessimistic and predictable.

In my career spanning over three decades, I have seen an equal number of both heros and have over a period of time learnt to respect and value both.

 Of what use are processes and controls, without great and revolutionary ideas in the first place. Of what use are revolutionary ideas if they are not converted into sustainable businesses.

The best thing of course is to build teams with the right chemistry – the right blend of team members with start-up and clean-up characteristics and abilities.

It is also important that organisations respect and celebrate both kinds of individuals and also get them both to respect each another and see the value in leveraging each other’s strengths to compensate for each other’s weaknesses.

Until that happens, we will see both kinds of heros in demand.

Now, what kind of a hero are you?

Our education, training and later our work lives demand that we be sure of ourselves. Damn sure of ourselves. We are expected to get our facts right and state it with clarity and confidence.  Don’t leave any room for doubt, we are told. Those who are seen as unsure, uncertain and tentative are considered ineffective.

So, when we got trained to become Coaches and our Coaching Skills Guru and facilitator Dr B J Prashantham pleaded that as coaches we would benefit if we were tentative in our approach and style, many of us just did not get it. Where is the question of being tentative when we are sure, many felt!

However, after months of training and the several coaching encounters later, all of us as coaches in our coaching community swear by the fine art of being tentative.

I am convinced that the art of being tentative is important not just for coaches but also for leaders,  in fact for anyone who desires to have a great conversation and build healthy relationships.

So, what is the fine art of being tentative all about?

To be tentative is to deliberately and mindfully cultivate a mind-set in which one remains open to new insights and information and points of view and demonstrates to others that one can never have the last word.

To be tentative is to withhold judgement.

To be tentative is to acknowledge that you never know the full truth about anything.

To be tentative is to be convinced that there is another point of view, another perspective that the person in front of you might have and that by being tentative, you might be able to discover it and harvest it and enrich your own world view.

To be tentative is to be alive to recognise that there is more to anything than what you think there is.

To be tentative is to also be as curious about what you don’t know as you are certain about what you know.

Let me give you an example. A CEO walks into a room, typically a review meeting with all his direct reports. Within minutes or even seconds  of a discussion on any topic being initiated, the CEO starts sharing his point of view, his conclusions and his views about what needs to be done – the assumption is that he has all the answers and others don’t. He is so sure of himself that he believes that there is nothing else to add, nothing else to be said. After a few minutes the team around him figures outs what is good for them. They say yes to everything he says and the meeting ends and then they go about doing what they think is right. Have you seen such a CEO? Chances are you have.

Now imagine a CEO who is tentative. He displays a curiosity to know what is in the minds of his team. He encourages them to speak. When he does interject, he uses semantics that are tentative.

(Tentative semantics would include phrases like, “I am wondering if ….”, I am not sure but you may want to consider looking at ….”, “Is it possible that ….”, “would you like to ….” )

As a result of being tentative, others in the room are encouraged to believe that there is space for other opinions and points of view. They join in and have real conversations. There are animated discussions and as a result, hopefully better quality decisions and greater ownership for outcomes.

Leaders who are tentative in their conversational style, encourage others to be open and speak up. They create a climate around them that is free and spontaneous.

Being tentative is especially useful in difficult conversations. Be it sharing feedback or raising difficult issues, the use of tentative language gives the other person the opportunity to add, modify, change or even withdraw or save face respectfully. Being tentative is like leaving a door or window open.

As coaches, a tentative approach encourages our clients to take responsibility for feedback, insights and of course their actions and commitments.

Being tentative is to act with humility despite knowing a lot!

Finally, by being tentative, it is also easier on us to accept that we were wrong and show that we are open to change! We can save face too!

The corporate world has been rejoicing over the fact that the draconian practice of forced distribution through the so called bell curve has been done away with.

So, what has it been replaced with?

From all my discussions with HR leaders and all the available information in the public domain it appears that the focus is less on annual ratings and more on frequent performance discussions aimed at setting people up for success in their roles.

 That sound pretty cool isn’t it? Just have many chats with your employees and not worry about the onerous task of differentiation of performance.

Well, actually not. It is certainly not as easy as it sounds. In fact my biggest fear is that forced distribution (where managers are forced to undertake relative rating) will be replaced with forced discussions (where managers are forced to have periodic discussions with employees.) We all know what happens when you force people to do anything.

At least, forced distribution had a method. It had an SOP. Also HR Managers were the fall guys if it did not work.

Now, that is being replaced with a practice that depends entirely on the skill and will of managers to have good conversations – a skill that is hugely in short supply. They are in fact being called upon to use these conversations to coach their team members for performance. Yes, the new reality is that Managers are expected to coach their team members for performance through the year through great conversations rather than merely rate them on how they have performed at the end of the year.

This to me is a great step, provided managers are equipped to coach for performance. If they are indeed equipped with those skills and do it well, it can change the culture and climate of organisations and make not just ratings but also performance management systems almost redundant. Well, that would be the day.

So, what are some of the elements of performance coaching for managers?

Shifting from position to person

The first ingredient of performance coaching is that managers must step outside their position and start relating to their team members as persons. In other words, they must be able to build a trust based relationship with their team members. This trust based relationship must be characterised by respect, genuineness, faith in the team members’ intrinsic motivation as well as their ability to find solutions and resisting the temptation to judge.  This will form the basis for engaging as a coach ans also earn them the right to have more difficult conversations.

Proficiency in conversation skills

Since the emphasis will shift from managing to coaching, managers will need to have all the skills for good conversations. This will include the ability to demonstrate high quality presence, the ability to listen with empathy, the ability to respond with understanding, the ability to convert confusion about what is happening into concreteness, the ability to confront dysfunctional behaviours, beliefs and mind-sets and the ability to facilitate action planning and finally holding the team member accountable for those plans.

Mastering the know-how

Performance coaching is all about understanding the psychology of how and why people perform or what comes in their way.

• The first element of such know-how is about setting the right goals and benchmarks. Managers must be able to set benchmarks and standards that are challenging and inspiring and yet achievable. Managers must also know how to present the job challenge in a way that is motivating.
• Managers must be able to help employees know where they stand on a regular basis so they can get better while also knowing that they are on the right track. This is all about giving feedback and removing blind spots.
• Managers must be able to spot and help address some of the self-talk of employees that is negative and self-defeating. In fact, this is perhaps the single biggest area of support that a manager can provide to facilitate superior performance.
• As performance coaches, Managers will also need to focus on the emotional well-being of their team members. This will include helping them cope with stress, failures and disappointments, fears and so on. This will also include encouragement and appreciation.
• Training for skills and job knowledge is yet another dimension of performance coaching, something that can certainly augment performance.  

While these many come naturally to some, for the vast majority, it must be imparted. Without the skills and the structure, managers many avoid having conversations or may have conversations that go badly.

Doing away with a system called for courage and we have shown the courage to do that. Replacing that with a new way, a new cultural orientation is the next big thing. The next decade will tell us if we have done on that count or not. If we do, we would have created a much more humane workplace.

That is certainly my hope.

Organisations love employees who are passionate about what they do or work with passion. In fact, passion often figures as a preferred value.

The reasons for this are understandable.

Passionate people love what they do and put their heart into it. Because they love what they do, they go out of their way and put the very best efforts to turn in great results almost every single time. Also, passionate people do all this because they want to make a difference, not just because they expect extrinsic rewards.

Their personal standards are often higher than what the organisation sets for them.  The associated behaviours of taking high ownership, being extremely absorbed in their work and bringing a certain intensity are often inspiring and infectious.

So, you see, Organisations would be fortunate if they had a bunch of passionate people at every level, in every function. Needless to say, a passionate founder or CEO or leader would be inspiring.

So, how can there be trouble at all with passionate people?

As is the case with many character strengths, passion can have its shadow side if such individuals have not paid attention to other important skills and abilities that bring balance. Many coaches, mentors and managers are constantly grappling with the task of helping a passionate employee deal with this shadow side even as they attempt to preserve it and leverage it for organisation good.

The shadow side

In my experience, there can be trouble or challenges with passionate people for one of many reasons:

High standards

Passionate people have such high standards for themselves. They push themselves very hard and are unforgiving if they do not turn in the very best every single time. Unfortunately, they expect this of all the people who work for or with them too. They fail to understand why others are not like them, why others do not bring their heart to work and why they cannot give their very best every single day.

Uni dimensional

For many passionate people, what they are pursing is all that matters in their life. This uni dimensional approach can make those close to them feel almost guilty – guilty that they are having fun, taking a vacation, going home early, watching a movie, just chatting up with friends and so on. This can also lead to burnout for the individual itself, especially when the person is overusing this strength.

Looking at the big picture

Sometimes passionate people can be so absorbed in the minutiae of what they are doing that they can fail to see the big picture. They may sometimes fail to see that 100% is not required in everything they do. They may fail to pay attention to the larger context including the impact of their words and actions. They may fail to recognise that means are as important as ends. They may also fail to be objective and recognise other valid and often contrary data staring at them.They may also fail to see that their style and approach can be unsustainable.

Limiting beliefs

Passionate people often carry limiting beliefs that if they do not worry or turn in the best or feel the excitement, they are not being true to themselves. They might have catastrophic visions of what might happen if they change.

Valuing differences

Passionate people can often be judgmental about others and can fail to recognise that others can be different, can have different needs and have a different approach which might also yield equally good results.

Emotional regulation

Passion is a great emotion and can yield great results. However, when not balanced with the right skills and attitudes, it can lead to frustration, disappointment and anger. Meetings and other interactions can be volatile .Many of their relationships can be fragile or even broken. It can lead them to believe that they are better off working by themselves than having to depend on others to get things done, their way.

High intensity

In general, it is wonderful to see and admire passionate people from a distance. However, those who have to work with or around passionate people will complain that their intensity is not easy to handle, especially not all day long.

Helping passionate people

Passionate people would benefit from help if their shadow side is causing challenges. The intent of help would be to make their effort sustainable, help them enjoy it than to rob them of their passion.

A lot of empathy, nurturing of their inner child, re-framing their beliefs and modifying some of their less useful behaviours can ensure that people with passion remain invaluable assets to the organisations they work for.

Whenever I am conducting a workshop on coaching and mentoring skills for leaders within organisations, I am almost always asked this difficult question. It is almost like an objection that is posed to a salesman making a sales call:

“All that you are saying is fine, but then, my boss is not at all coaching oriented or people oriented. In fact, he is the very opposite. He does not stand for any of the values that you are talking about? Are you going to be training him? How do I get myself to practice all this when my everyday experience is to the contrary?”

Like a salesman who learns to handle sales objections, I have over the years learnt to answer this question with candour and conviction. However, I am always left with this honest confession in my heart: It must be very hard for someone to demonstrate empathy, interest in others, show concern for their well being and foster their development when one receives the exact opposite from people they look up to.

What indeed is the truth about bad people at the top? And how can a leader or manager embrace and demonstrate a positive style despite not being a recipient of the same?

I would like to draw a distinction between difficult people and bad people at the top.

(I am attaching a technical rather than dictionary meaning to the words Difficult and Bad)

Difficult People

Difficult people in my view are people for whom all or some dimensions of their emotional intelligence may not be well developed. In a large number of cases, poor emotional regulation is what causes most distress to the people that work for them. They tend to lose their temper and say things that might hurt others. Some might fail to empathise, might have difficulty in building and maintaining relationships or might be unappreciative.

However, at their core, they have good intentions, want to be good spouses, a good parent, a good boss and so on. After every episode of dysfunctional behaviour they might show remorse. They are also open to feedback and receiving help.

Bad People

Psychological literature is full of descriptions and insights into personality traits, character orientations and behaviours of people that I call Bad. Sigmund Freud identified three such personality types: erotic, obsessive, and narcissistic. Eric Fromm came up with four different character orientations: receptive orientation, exploitative orientation, hoarding orientation, and marketing orientation. Psychologists have also come to describe the three common undesirable personality traits as ‘The Dark Triad’: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathic.

Michael Maccoby who was trained by Eric Fromm and recognised globally for his expertise on leadership has dealt with some of these very same dysfunctionalities in his book The Productive Narcissist: The Promise and Peril of Visionary Leadership.

These personality traits and descriptions collectively represent a comprehensive universe of what I call Bad. 

In my view and experience, Bad people have little or no regard for other’s feelings or thoughts.

They also display a very high level of selfishness and focus on themselves.

Their desire to win is so high that they want to win even when it does not matter. Given this desire to win, they exploit other people and win at others’ expense. They see others in strictly utilitarian terms, somebody to manipulate for their own ends. They may also play with others’ emotions when they need something done by them.

This means they may not have an interest in others and their development or well-being.

They may come across as extremely competitive and unable to tolerate dissent. They also create an air of fear using the consequences of punishment within the team. This makes it hard for them to collaborate with the ones who need their help in an empowering way.

They may also overstate their accomplishments and may convert every platform as a platform for looking good, and being under the spotlight including their interactions with someone who needs help.

They may also have an excessive concern with orderliness, perfectionism and a high need for control over everything including others, time and the environment. To this end they may be seen as dominant in all social and work interactions.

Sadly, these traits are not present in isolation but appear in combination with other highly functional personality elements. They are gifted with a sharp intellect, great communication skills, limitless charm, courage, energy and the drive to achieve great results and take the organisation to great heights. They are therefore often extremely successful and effective in what they do and that often gets them to the very top.

However, some of their weaknesses and faults can have hugely undesirable consequences for the people they lead and engage with.

So, if you have trouble with your boss, ask yourself if he or she is Difficult or bad. I am guessing (and hoping) that for most of you the answer would be Difficult.

If he or she is merely difficult, that is great news. 

All the modern tools of development hold great promise in helping Difficult people get better. Any empathy, support and encouragement demonstrated by you can only create a conducive environment for change.

As for Bad people, I can only tell you what I did – I quit! 

(the image is that of Niccolò Machiavelli. The term Machiavellian originated from his ideas expressed in his work, The Prince. His most famous quote is it is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.)

Hind sight is a perfect science. In the last few days all the wise men and women have shared their wisdom about what went wrong at Tata Sons and how it could have been avoided. In hind sight, all this seems to make great sense.

As a Coach and Coach Provider involved quite deeply with helping leaders manage transitions, I can only say this: It appears that Cyrus Mistry’s transition into the role as Chairman of Tata Sons may not have been well managed from all sides and therefore resulted in these unfortunate consequences.

If that was indeed at the root of the problem, I would like to believe that the task of helping the next Chairman manage his or her transition successfully will assume very great significance. In fact, such a successful transition may hugely impact the fortunes of the Group.

In this post, I would like to share my thoughts on why transition is tough and what organisations and the transitioning leaders can do to make it a success. This can apply to the next Chairman of Tata Sons or to any other senior and Board level hire for that matter.

The challenges of transition

In planning to support transition, we will need to first recognise some of the potential challenges that the incumbent will face.

In the case of Tatas, it is fair to assume that very few (if any) potential candidates are likely to have been Chairman of a $100 billion global conglomerate in diverse businesses before taking on this role. Many transitions call for taking on something which is very new and different.

The second is to recognise that the cultural milieu of this group is very unique and can take a lot to understand, accept, respect and function in, leave alone change. This is true for most organisations with a history and that can make transition tricky.

The third is to recognise that the organisational and business context of the group is so unique and different and distinct that there are likely to be few parallels or past experiences to fall back on. Past success is seldom a guarantee for smooth transition.

All this means that even the most competent hire will need to learn and unlearn a lot to make a smooth transition.

Most importantly, even the most competent leader will find it hard to do it on his or her own – they will need help and support. Of course, there must be willingness to give and receive. Such help and support can come from the Board, the CHRO and of course from the one who is handing over the reins.

A potential strategy for transition.

One or more transition partners / coaches / mentors

It would be not just useful but important to place at the disposal of the transitioning leader a panel of resources (called by any name) whose mandate is to help the leader make the transition successful. This could be members of the nomination committee, one or more members of the Board, a seasoned external Leader or a seasoned Coach.

This panel should be able to help the leader draw up a transition support plan, help the leader implement the plan and in general be available to the leader as a co-navigator as he encounters some of the inevitable road blocks or landmines.

Of course, the most important role needs to be played by the person one is replacing or succeeding. This person needs to be the sponsor for transition support.

A transition plan

A transition support plan is likely to include the following interconnected elements:

Building trust based relationship with key stakeholders

The most difficult part of any transition is the fact that all the stakeholders are new, each of them have views, expectations, influences, interests and being able to work with them effectively is often a prerequisite to success.

The person from whom one is taking over (or whom one is succeeding) would certainly be the most important stakeholder with whom the incumbent needs to develop a very deep trust-based relationship. If the outgoing leader has been around for decades and is leaving behind a legacy, the stakes are even higher to build a relationship and of course take an appreciative view of that legacy.

The shareholders and their representatives on the board are very important stakeholders. Developing a deep understanding of what they are looking for, what they value and what they don’t is critical. So also, the other members of the Board are key stakeholders.

To build relationships, the leader may need to create platforms and forums and other formal and informal opportunities to connect, debrief and discuss.

As has been well established through a lot of research, warmth and relationship have to precede task and competence.

Figuring out the ways of working

Every organisation and group has its one unique and distinct ways of working. Older the Group, more deeply entrenched and embedded are these ways of working, thinking, feeling and acting. Understanding them and respecting them is absolutely necessary before even imagining that one can change it.

The cultural stories, the historical perspectives and other folklore must be learnt and understood and for this one needs to connect and access people who have been there and seen it all.

Picking the right agendas and leaving the holy cows alone

What the transitioning leader chooses to work on in the early days is critical. That determines the kind of stories that get created about him and does the rounds. Are these positive, low risk agendas? Are these controversial high risk agendas?

Does the leader know what are the holy cows which he must approach with caution? Does he know the things which if changed or challenged are likely to help or hinder building relationships with all or some of the stakeholders?

If the leader picks on the wrong agenda, he or she needs urgent feedback from the transition partners so that course correction is possible.

Negotiate the role making process

Most often, what the last incumbent did is what is set as the default role expectation from the new entrant.

On the other hand, it is quite natural for any new leader to want to redefine and re-negotiate the way the role will be played or give it a new slant or twist or even a new avatar.

If the new leader envisions a radically new role, he or she must know that it will take a huge effort in selling it, campaigning for it and even lobbying to get that version of the role accepted. It will help if the leader is able to brainstorm about these possibilities with someone.

Style blind spots

Leaders might be blind to how their particular style is working in the new context. They might have been successful in a certain context by acting in a certain way. They may not be clear about the style shifts that they will need to make to succeed in the new setting. They may just be too busy to pay attention to these things.

Should one be hands on, get into details or adopt an empowering style? Should one be pace setting, should one respect boundaries? These are style questions that one needs to ask oneself.

Similarly, should one focus on short-term issues or pay attention to issues with a longer time horizon is a question to ask.

Unless someone holds a mirror for the leader or obtains feedback and feed-forward and shares it, he or she will remain blind to the impact of their style in the new context and may even cause some collateral damage.

New skills and competencies

The new role may demand of the leader, new skills and competencies. Acquiring them urgently might be mission critical. For example, if managing multiple stakeholders is not something that this leader has done in the past, learning to do it quickly is critical. If being inspirational is not something that comes to the person naturally, the person needs to get somewhat comfortable with it. If learning to be patient and knowing that it takes days to turn a ship around is a missing skill, then that skill will need to be nurtured.

Calibration

A transitioning leader is often flying blind. He needs to constantly calibrate his views, intentions and action based on emerging realities and reactions. Having access to one or more transition partners can help in this calibration process.

The first step

Organisations spend enormous amounts of time and money in identifying, assessing and selecting internal and external candidates for mission critical positions. However, most believe that their job ends when the person is hired or appointed. That is perhaps the gravest error in judgment. The selection job might be done but the transition job starts and we need to be alive to that reality.

The transitioning leader needs to display the humility to be able to accept help when offered and not believe that he or she can do it alone.

 When a transition is handled well, we protect the organisation from avoidable risks. When ignored or mismanaged, we bring upon ourselves a huge amount of avoidable misery, sufferance, stress and wasted energy and of course bad press. It pains me when I see otherwise great institutions and their creators suffering because they failed to pay attention to some of these human dimensions of leadership.

I really wish that the next Chairman succeeds or for that matter every new leader in every new context succeeds.

How and when does a reputed Hotel decide if its young front office employees or cashiers or order takers can actually begin to handle guests? When are wealth management professionals permitted to start engaging with clients to give them information or guide them with their wealth management decisions? For that matter, when does a pilot get to fly the plane or a surgeon begin to perform surgeries?

One of the most important moments of truth for any professional is when he or she gets to go live and perform a task or offer a service or deal with real customers. This is a big moment and the manner in which it is handled can make a lot of difference not just to the recipients of the service but also the professional himself or herself. When managed well, the professional grows in confidence, stature and of course competence. Or else, the professional can make mistakes, cause huge risks to the recipients and harm to the reputation of the function or profession and of course end up feeling completely demotivated.

HR Professionals are no different.

Have we all not seen many a new HR professional starting off his or her career facing customers (employees and people managers) without due training and preparation and as a consequence suffer humiliation, loss of confidence and of course add ammunition to the perennial criticism about the function.

In fact, a large number of the so-called HR business partners who were hoping to do strategic stuff end up solving problems or trouble shooting mostly because somewhere some young, new and mostly untrained HR professional who was the first port of call did not do what was meant to be done in an error free manner.

So, when can we say an HR Professional is ready to be put in front of customers? In my view, there are at least five clear areas in which the person needs to acquire a base level of proficiency before being cleared to engage with internal customers.

Understand the organisation’s published policies, products and programs

Every new HR professional must be completely familiar with all the published HR products, programs, processes and polices of the organisation. This familiarity should help them answer basic questions and explain how they work, why they are the way they are, how one can avail of them or comply with them. The HR professional must be fully familiar with anything that is put in the public domain by the function – intranet, bulletin boards and mails – no different from the way B2C businesses keep its customer facing employees fully briefed about all new products, services and offerings.

Understand how pay, benefits and other policies are actually administered

It is equally important for the new HR professional to know how the company’s payroll actually works, how various benefits are administered, how provident fund get remitted or withdrawn, how some of the basic employee welfare services like cafeteria, transport and so on work, how things like attendance and leave are recorded and computed, how new employees get enabled, how HR service providers are paid, how tax is computed, how the final settlement works and so on.

This unfortunately is easier said than done. With most HR functions at least in large organisations moving towards shared services, I am beginning to see a worrying trend. We have an entire generation of young HR professionals who are completely disconnected from the role of aiding policy implementation. They are growing up believing that they can leapfrog into business partnering and leave this seemingly inconsequential stuff to shared services.

Young HR professionals would do well to spend at least a few mandatory months working in shared services. This way, they will understand how the basics work and also experience the moments of truth as faced by employees.

Young HR Professionals must also get proficient in case work – solving some of the most common problems or issues or complaints or grievances that are raised by employees and their managers. By learning to analyse these problems under due guidance, they will also figure out what typically goes wrong and how they can fix it with a spirit of service orientation.

Training in service skills

HR professionals must be trained in the basics of service skills so they can present a very professional image of themselves and their functions. They must know how to greet and answer the phone which rings at their desk professionally. They must be asked to choose ring tones which are neutral and do not announce their musical tastes to the world. They must know how to respond to mails with clarity and accuracy and know that a mail is different from a text message.

They must know how to handle an irate employee. They must be able to listen with empathy and respond with understanding to an employee or a manager who has an issue and is looking for a solution or just wants to be heard.

They must know how to handle a complaint without becoming defensive and also know how to recover when there is a service failure. They must know how not to take the employees’ anger towards company policies and processes personally.

They must above all be well groomed. It may be fine for a young employee to wear faded jeans to work. But an HR professional who is supposed to be the custodian of critical people processes and represent the organisation to the outside and inside world, should be groomed professionally.

Commit to standards of professional excellence

HR Professionals must know that they are bound by certain standards that form the bedrock of their profession.

Upholding fairness in all that they do is one such standard. Bring committed to the safety and security of employees is another standard. Maintaining confidentiality about employee information is yet another standard. Being a role model on the business conduct guidelines of the organisation is a fourth such standard.

They must know why these are important and what the consequences of non-adherence are.

Role clarity

The new HR professional must not only be clear about his or her role but also his or her larger responsibility towards the function and its overall service quality levels. When faced with an employee query or issue, the professional should readily offer to help and not say it is not his or her job – just the way, a well-trained hotel staff will make every effort to help a guest with any problem in a seamless way no matter which department he or she belongs.

Once a young HR professional qualifies across these five basics dimensions, at least to an acceptable level, we might say that the person is service ready. He or she can now be safely put in front of employees or managers with the assurance that the person will do what is right for the person and the profession and through those actions grow in confidence and professional stature. On this carefully built foundation, the person will of course need to keep adding higher and higher levels of competence on a daily basis.

Until that is achieved, it is best that he or she wears an “HR Trainee” badge and merely shadows a trained senior.