Indian Social Values – Root of Corruption

Page three newspapers are full of celebrities’ rave parties, fist fights, sex scandals, botox treatments, etceteras. The not so rich idealize these celebrities and mimic all, to be the in-crowd. With these social values, can Indian’s consider it cool to be good?

The west puts India on the pulpit for its values. From Beatles to Julia Roberts, western celebrities talk about Indian culture of prayers, the land of discovering one’s spirit and sense of being. When majority of the middle class Indians themselves are lost, the crown of leader of spiritual world appears  somewhat misplaced. Indians in the present world, from birth, get to understand that all human emotions come at a price. This may sound as a harsh statement, but is reality. Let us walk through the different phases of life of a middle class Indian to discover the spiritual compromises they make.

1. Indian Childhood

India post-independence from a land of leaders propagating good values  has turned into a land people indulging in  unscrupulous behavior in the name of social values. It starts with birth. From the 1960′s the desire to have a son grew among parents. Educated parents get female fetus aborted  since the son has more value in the marriage market. The sex ratio is 109.4 males to 100 females in 2011. According to reports nearly 50,000 female fetus are aborted every month.

The reason for abortions is financial. According to the Indian system, a girl’s father in arranged marriages pays dowry for getting a husband for his daughter. Secondly, in the conservative families daughters aren’t allowed to work. Hence, the cost of raising a daughter, educating her, is lost while a son earns back the money for parents from working and getting a dowry. Therefore, sons get a better treatment from parents from birth. From food, clothes, education and hobbies the girl is forced to sacrifice for the brother. Basically, from the day a child is conceived, Indian parents put a value on the child. There is a profit and loss motive in child upbringing.

With these values apparent in the household from childhood, is it surprising that Indians ethical values are confused? Can a child raised on the basis of returns s/he will bring to the parents on becoming an adult, consider emotions and principles above money? Are parents raising kids or cattle for sale?

2. Indian Youth

Indian parents tom-tom about their love for their children and their dedication to keep the children with them. They look down on their western counterparts, who let the kids leave home between the age of 16-20 years to live on their own. In India, 30 year old unmarried sons and daughters can also be found living with their parents. It arises from an attempt to control who the youngster marries, specially for sons, so that a big fat dowry can be earned.

In respect to daughters, it is a need to keep their image unsullied. A daughter having an affair is a no-no among conservative families. Good girls don’t have relationship with boys. While the boys can have relationships with girls, and any girl who has a sexual relationship with a boy is of loose moral character. It it surprising that with this culture, Indian youth does not have normal relationships with the opposite gender.

India is the 4th most unsafe place in the world. Eve teasing or sexual harassment is rampant and young Indian women endure comments from men even when walking to office at 9 a.m. According to a survey of developing nations, Indian men are the most sexually violent, with 24% having committed a sexual crime. Another survey states 65% men believe sometimes a women deserves to be beaten. With these results and mindset, can one ensure gender equality at work?

An Indian’s professional mentor/buddy in the first job is the person who teaches them to fudge the reimbursement bills of their salary. For instance, employees are entitled to medical reimbursements. The friendly mentor will share information of a medical store from where fraudulent medical bills can be obtained by giving a cut.

After being raised in this culture, can Indian youth have independent thinking, proper adult relationships and professional values? Most lip sync their parents’ desires for them, rather than discovering and understanding their own being. Abnormal behavior – living with one’s parents in adulthood, harassing opposite gender – is socially considered normal. Normal behavior of having adult relationships, independent living and maintaining professional ethics, may make the youth a social outcast. After being raised in this social climate, can Indian youth make India the next superpower?

3. Indian Marriage

The biggest trade in India, is of arranged marriages. Marriages aren’t made in heaven, they are negotiated for the best deal. The sons are put up for sale and the daughters’ fathers attempts to purchase the best available husband for her, according to their financial position.

If one sees it from an economic angle, the husband to provide for the wife lifelong, takes upfront payment from his wife’s father. Looking from another angle, the woman gets a man to have sex with her for life after being paid by her father. Prostitution is illegal in India, and prostitutes are looked down upon. But sale and purchase of husband and wife is a socially accepted norm.

In rural areas, the situation is worse. If a couple belonging to different castes falls in love, the male members of the girl’s family do honor killing, they kill the couple. It is a crime to fall in love, and humiliating for the parents. From all this one can conclude that Indian rational of honor, esteem and self-respect is quite contrary to human race.

Even divorce involves social stigma. In reality, 90% of urban husbands have had extra marital affairs. Most of the urban wives are educated but don’t leave their marriages even after being aware of the affair, as their standard of living will become lower. India has one of the lowest divorce rates with just one in a hundred marriages collapsing. There are just around 10,000 or so divorce cases filed each year. Despite the fact that there were 8391 dowry deaths in 2010 and 90,000 cases of torture and cruelty towards women by their husbands. This is when most women don’t report to police due to sense of social shame. Aren’t the numbers ironical. Abusing women is considered a social privilege of the Indian male. Moreover, educated women prefer to take abuse rather than stand on their own two feet and earn their living.

Closing Thoughts

Can Indian marriages teach valuing human emotions when they are nothing more than a financial transaction? After parent-child relationship, the second most precious relationship is of husband-wife. In India, both have monetary values attached to it. When critical relationships are not based on ethics, what is the probability of the society respecting professional ethics?

Indian ideas of honor, respect, ethics and principles are bunkum. A thief steals a women’s purse, he is a criminal. A  husband steals his wife’s dignity and her father’s retirement saving, he is respectable. It is a case of sacrificing rational thinking to camouflage social ills.

Last week, the government issued a “White paper on black money”. The paper describes ways and methods to curb corruption and reduce black money. However, with this social environment, the best efforts are likely to fail. Can an average Indian be considered as having a fully developed “Conscience”? Anywhere close to spiritual awakening? What do you think?

References:

1. Disappearing Daughters: Women pregnant with Girls pressured into abortion
2. Divorce Rate High Among Indian Techies
3. Dowry murders in India result in few convictions
4. Indian men most sexually violent, says survey of six developing nations
5. International Center for Research on Women

A Women’s Day Special – Play with Colors of Life

“How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?”   ― Anaïs Nin

Women are smart. They demand equality and have a special day for women. Men claim superiority and have no men’s day. One can say the rest of the days are of them, but are they? The male gender suffers; poor chaps can’t even protest as it isn’t a masculine trait to show weakness. Women can complain, shed tears, howl their heart out and it reflects feminine traits. Mothers teach sons – boys don’t cry. Wives complain – Husbands are unemotional. Haven’t women successfully shackled men in a stereotypical image from birth?

Shouldn’t women be fighting for the male cause to bring in some emotional gender equality? Shall we start by being a bit more honest ? Lets discuss some of the things that women should do for themselves and the male gender on this women’s day.

1. Miss Goody Two Shoes

Men are convinced women are more principled, honest and virtuous than them. Women have done a wonderful job of personal brand building. Most haven’t got their hands dirty publicly. However, surveys say women participate equally in sexual harassment in offices and are showing increasing propensity to commit white collar crime as their ratios improve in the workforce. Moreover, they backbite, rumor monger, tattletale and indirectly bully more than men in offices. Women are more likely to use sex to get a promotion. Yes, some strategically decide to sleep with the boss to boost their careers.

Women play an equal role in making destructive management practices flourish in an organization and do not hesitate to use them for personal gain. Let us stop playing the blame game and take ownership to improve the work climate within our organizations.

2. Women’s Worst Enemies

Women undercut women. They make loud claims that male gender does not support them. However, women make bad bosses to junior women. Women ruin careers of aspiring young women to remove competition. They feel insecure if men give attention to a younger woman, hence damage the youngsters chances of succeeding. If a senior male wishes to harass a young female, he uses her female colleagues to do so to avoid sexual harassment charges.

While women target the men’s club for all the negative events happening to them, they fail to collaborate to form a women’s club. With 20-50% female workforce in offices, female leaders need to push for reforms in their offices that benefit the gender. Laying the blame on male CXOs door doesn’t absolve women leaders of their responsibilities.

3. The Sacrificing Souls

Women undersell themselves by portraying the picture of sacrificing souls. At every opportunity they lament about the difficulties of being a mother and a career women. Yes, they have to make sacrifices but so do men, specially single dads. It is difficult but stop crying about it all the time. As Gloria Steimen said- “I have yet to hear a man ask for advice on how to combine marriage and a career.” 

Being successful is about managing different priorities effectively. Have you seen successful men or women incessantly talking about the same universal issue? Husband, kids and career are a woman’s personal choice, hence its an individual decision. No man or woman is going to get all three handed on a silver platter for all times. There is no point in attempting to win the corporate battle using these tactics.

Closing Thoughts

Fight the battle of equality on ethical and principled grounds, without playing the victim. Successful women don’t enact the damsel in distress routines while pointing fingers at others. Quit complaining and enjoy the colors of life. Be fair, be just and give both genders an equal chance of succeeding on merit and talent.

I know, women will be mad at me for writing this post.  But what to do, 90% of my readers are men .

Wishing all my readers a special women’s day and a happy Holi.

Women in Indian Boardrooms

You might be saying, “Oh, not again about women”. But this is one piece of news I wanted to share and discuss with you. Believe it or not, the New Companies Bill 2011 has a provision making it mandatory for companies to have one woman director on the board. One can look forward to more corporate women becoming rock stars. Female gender was mostly invisible in Indian boardrooms, may now gain some significant visibility.

Though personally I am against the idea of reservations and believe women should succeed on merit. I go by Charlotte Whitton’s quote – “For a woman to get half as much credit as a man, she has to work twice as hard, and be twice as smart. Fortunately, that isn’t difficult.” However, in India’s case I think reservation may really be beneficial. I am discussing two biases that are restricting the growth of women in corporate sector.

1. The Indian Bias

As mentioned in an earlier post, India has over 500 million women however just 335 held directorship positions in listed companies, that is less than 5% of total board of directors. Across the world women face a concrete ceiling (not glass ceilings, these are easier to break) in getting senior positions. In US,  for the last few years the percentage of women in senior management positions is 13-15% with no significant growth. Norway shows the highest percentage with around 30% women holding board positions. These countries have such low percentages of women at senior level although their social culture supports equality of genders.

In India, only the constitution recognizes equality of genders. The social structure is biased against girls from the day they are born. This is because of the age old dowry custom in India. On marriage, the brides father has to give a big fat amount to the grooms family to get his daughter married off. In most families, if the money is not given, either the girl will not get a suitable match in arranged marriage or if she does, she is be harassed in her husband’s family. Women are not considered earning partners and in conventional families are not allowed to work. Hence, they don’t have economic power.

Just to emphasize the negative conditions of women living in India, including in urban areas, here is some shocking statistics :

1. The Gender Gap Report 2011 of World Economic Report ranks India 113 out of the total 135 countries measured.

2. An article on domestic violence mentions that “according to United Nation Population Fund Report, around two-third of married Indian women are victims of domestic violence and as many as 70 per cent of married women in India between the age of 15 and 49 are victims of beating, rape or forced sex.”

3.  According to National Crime Bureau 2010 report on Crime Against Women – “A total of 2,13,585 incidents of crime against women (both under IPC and SLL) were reported in the country during 2010 as compared to 2,03,804 during 2009″. India is amongst the most unsafe countries in the world. In 2010 there were over 22,000 rape cases and over 8000 dowry death cases reported.

Seeing the cultural and social bias against women a whole lot depends on their economic power. Hopefully, with this law, with more women in boardrooms the social mindset will change somewhat. When more visible stories of successful females are reported by the media, the Gen Y women might get a better deal and opportunities to gain financial independence. They might have more support from their families to hold a job and earn a living. Hence, this law gives Indian women a lot of hope and an opportunity to dream big.

2. The Global Bias

Before I discuss this point, here is a quiz, check out which of the words apply to your working style:

Aggression,  Empowerment, Autocracy, Communication, Management, Collaboration, Rules, Consultative,  Win-Lose, Social-sharing, Boss-hierarchy, Win-Win, Competition, Emotional Intelligence, Procedures, Teamwork, Control, Relationships, Toughness, Networking, Command and Empathy.

This may surprise you, the words above in red describe mostly a male working style and those in blue relate to female working style. The present global economy the female traits are in demand. As Tom Peters had mentioned in his presentation on gender diversity, women lead in 18 of the 20 attributes required in the present work environment. If companies wish to change their organization culture to meet the challenges of current economic environment, then doesn’t it make sense to hire more women as they naturally have these traits.

Here is another twist on strengths analysis. Traditional thinking is that competitiveness and command traits ensure success. On the contrary, there are numerous traits required in employees for an organization to be successful. For instance, too many planners and judgement oriented employees in a team will delay action, flexibility and innovation.  Interestingly, the book Strengths Finders 2.0 authored by Tom Rath mentions 34 strengths. People have a group of these strengths that can be leveraged to be successful in the business environment. I am listing the strengths here.  Read below and find out which strengths you have and are they really appreciated in your organization.

1) Achiever, 2) Activator, 3) Adaptability, 4) Analytical, 5) Arranger, 6) Belief, 7) Command,  8) Communication, 9) Competition, 10) Connectedness, 11) Consistency, 12) Context, 13) Deliberative,   14) Developer, 15) Discipline, 16) Empathy, 17) Focus, 18) Futuristic, 19) Harmony, 20) Ideation, 21) Includer, 22) Individualization, 23) Input, 24) Intellection, 25) Learner, 26) Maximizer, 27) Positivity,   28) Relator, 29) Responsibility, 30) Restorative, 31) Self-Assurance, 32) Significance, 33) Strategic and 34) Woo (winning others over)

On reading this list, irrespective of gender the question comes up – if as an employee you have attributes or strengths that are not valued in the organization, then what do you do?  .

In my view, the crux of the problem is that organizations are biased towards certain strengths. For example, Apple, Google and other technology companies may be are more focused on intellection, learner and strategic traits whereas in military the focus is on command, discipline and belief. The employees with different strengths are not encouraged, though balance makes organizations more successful. Hence, if one delves deeper the issue is not about gender, it is about the traits that are valued in the organization.  Usually gender equality is facing hurdles as macho traits are more appreciated in organizations. Hence, where boards are all male, women are not welcome. Organizations where non-macho traits are valued, generally have more women at all levels including the top.

Closing Thoughts

In India, without economic power women are unlikely to be respected. Though Indian mythology talks a lot of women equality, respect and honor, the reality is different. Hence to break the vicious circle, this law will help. The benefits will be the same as reservations of seats for women in panchayats in rural India.

On the global front, organizations need to develop an appreciation of non-masculine traits. As evident from advertising and branding of some successful companies, women consumer power matters. Without having women at the top, an all male bastion cannot understand the softer requirements of female consumers. It makes sense to have women deciding for women.

If you don’t agree with me, take this instance. Ask any hubby to buy a gift for his wife, he will sound as if he has to do a torturous task rather than a happy shopping expedition. Husbands complain they don’t know what their wife wants, and male board of directors decide on female consumers preferences. Then men say women are illogical. Couldn’t resist that one.

References:

1. Gender Gap Report 2011 – World Economic Forum
2. Domestic Violence in India: Causes, Consequences and Remedies
3. Crime Against Women report 2010 of National Bureau of Crime.
4. Strengths Finder 2.0 by Tom Rath

Risky Selection of Leaders

Everybody in the business world has a litany of woes about leaders. There are many causes attributed to it, but the pertinent question is- are we choosing the right leaders or is this a case of blind choosing the blind? I found some flabbergasting research highlighting that leadership selection is mostly done on attributes perceived to make a person successful. More often than not, the actual traits required for leadership are ignored.  Read on to assess for yourself whether organizations are doing risky selection of leaders.

1.    What attributes are organizations looking for?

The “2009 Best Companies for Leadership” report of Hay Group with Bloomberg identified 20 companies globally that were best in developing leadership talent. The results indicated that these companies gave better shareholder returns in short-term and over a 10-year period than the S&P 500. Infosys Technologies was the only Indian company in the listed 20. The graph below shows the traits top 20 companies value in leaders. Strategic thinking, execution and soft skills rate above technical skills.

2.    What is the percentage of effective leaders?

On the face of it, the above-mentioned attributes seem to be present in most of the staff. However, another survey -“The Global Leadership Forecast 2011” conducted by DDI  “found that only 33 percent of HR leaders are highly confident in their frontline leaders’ ability to ensure the future success of their organization.”  Now these frontline leaders are critical to the growth of the business as they interact with the customers. Hence, their leadership is crucial for increasing profitability of the organization

Secondly, in the long run these frontline managers are most likely to become business unit heads and hold other critical positions in the organization. We assume that with experience the leadership capabilities improve. This is an incorrect assumption. A research conducted by Hogan and Curphy (2004) asserts that managerial incompetence base rates are as high as 50% of all managers. So where are we going wrong? Dolitch & Cairo succinctly described the problem in the following words:

It’s instructive that an individual as ideally suited to a job as Pitt (former SEC chairman) could ultimately fail.  Too often, we assume that someone whose professional background is a perfect fit for a job—who has the ideal combination of intellectual acumen, experience, and expertise—cannot fail.  The lesson:  Never underestimate the power of personality in undermining the success of even the most brilliant and well-suited leader. (Dotlich & Cairo, 2003, p. 62)

3.    How are managers doing on personal attributes?

A 2010 survey of HayGroup- Emotional Intelligence at the heart of performance – identified the crux of the problem. It showed that out of 12 competencies for measuring emotional intelligence – 20% of the respondents had no strengths, 52% had 3 or fewer and just 16% had 9 or more. This means, that just 16% of the respondents are emotionally capable of being good leaders.

ESCI scores further analysis indicated that – the competencies typically seen as strength include achievement orientation, teamwork and organizational awareness. Whereas, those that typically require most development include emotional self-awareness, conflict management, influence and inspirational leadership. Think of it, without the emotional intelligence to understand one’s own and other people’s behavior, – can an individual positively influence others, lead teams and inspire people?

This means two things. First, that society doesn’t have a high percentage of emotionally intelligent people. Second, people without the emotional intelligence get leadership positions on technical and execution skills. Beyond a point, this results in failed leadership and causes damage to the organization. Leaders with low emotional self-awareness de-motivate 60% of the staff. The staff is disengaged, suffers in a toxic work environment and organization faces retention problems.

 4.    Why do organizations choose ineffective leaders?

 In light of the above facts, we assume the organizations should be doing a better job at selecting leaders. However, they are failing because psychologically humans chose leaders with negative traits. I am highlighting a couple of aspects on it.

Strategic thinking is the most important skill organizations are looking for amongst leaders. To develop a good strategy, leaders need to be creative thinkers. However, as I wrote previously in the article “Creativity @ Risk” based on the Jenniger S. Mueller’s research paper – people don’t chose leaders with creative ideas. When a person with creative ideas is pitted against a standard thinker who follows established norms, the standard thinker wins the leadership selection battle. People select the creative thinker only when specifically asked to choose a charismatic leader. Therefore, people by themselves may not choose an inspiring leader.  That means, people chose leaders based with whom they are comfortable with, rather than the intellectual capability of the leader. The clear message is that organizations will get strategic thinkers and inspiring leaders only when they specifically focus on identifying, developing and promoting them.

The second aspect is the soft skills or emotional competencies of the leaders. A research paper by Robert W. Livingston, Taya R. Cohe, & Nir Halevy titled – Empowering the wolf in sheep’s clothing: Why people choose the wrong leaders – highlights that people tend to chose leaders with harmful attributes and lacking emotional skills.  The research indicates that there is stark difference in what people say that they value as leadership traits and the people they select as leaders. People chose leaders who are socially appealing but may not be interested in the welfare of the group. Social individuals are perceived as high status. Although they may be more self-serving, power seeking and self-promoting, people prefer them to an altruistic person.

This means, paradoxically people chose a person as a leader who is domineering and competitive  rather than an empathic team player concerned over the welfare of his team mates. Nice guys lose the battle of leadership. Therefore, we shouldn’t be surprised that organizations have such aggressive cultures with backstabbing and backbiting being the norm.

The quandary is, that in a drive to achieve targets and growth, competitive people rule. The thinkers, team players, influencers and change agents are not preferred choice for leadership roles. The excessive focus on achieving numbers itself reduces profitability due to destructive corporate culture.

Organizations need to maintain balance while selecting leaders. The right mix is required. A sales team leader needs to be more emotionally aware of customer reactions and be sociable. On the other hand, to develop and train resources a learning and development leader needs to be altruistic and empathetic. Hence, organizations will reduce leadership selection risks by identifying various emotional capabilities and soft skills required by a leader to fulfill a job description.

 Closing thoughts

 When one does the math for ineffective leaders, the failure rate is remarkable. While most organizations are focusing on developing leadership talent, a root cause analysis for failure of leadership and selection of ineffective leaders is not done. Realization dawns normally when organization is on the brink of a catastrophe.

Therefore, it is a good idea to build in an emotional competency evaluation system for selecting leaders. A fine balance has to be maintained between technical and emotional competency of the individual and organization objectives and culture. Without plotting the data on a matrix and evaluating it objectively, organizations might not get the right leaders. While leadership is a soft skill organizations require hard data to select a good leader. Leaders can make or break an organization; hence, huge risks occur when wrong leaders are selected. Risk managers must call management attention for selecting good leaders by conducting a leadership skill assessment.

References:

1. Better Leaders, Better Outcomes The Power of Selection Tools to Drive Business Results – A research paper by DDI

2. 2009 Best Companies  for Leadership -The future of leadership: a spotlight on the best -Hay Group Webinar Feb 18, 2010

3. EI at the heart of performance -The implications of our 2010 ESCI research – Hay Group

4. Empowering the wolf in sheep’s clothing: Why people choose the wrong leaders – Robert W. Livingston, Taya R. Cohen, & Nir Halevy- Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University

Moral Disengagement in Organizations

In a recent interview with Barbara Walters of ABC News, Bernie Madoff didn’t have much concern for the victims of his massive fraud, though was deeply worried about the impact of his actions on his family. He said in the interview – “I understand why clients hate me. The gravy train is over. I can live with that.” He added -”The average person thinks I robbed widows and orphans. I made wealthy people wealthier.” Even after imprisonment, he is morally disengaged. He justifies that defrauding the wealthy is okay and not that big a crime.

How does a normally functioning human being become morally disengaged to an extent that all crimes done by him or her appear rational? The thinking is that the end justifies the means and criminal behavior is not a big deal. Let us explore the impact of moral disengagement on human behavior and its impact on organizations.

In the paper “Moral Disengagement In The Perpetration Of Inhumanities” the author Albert Bandura states – “Moral agency is manifested in both the power to refrain from behaving inhumanely and the proactive power to behave humanely. Moral agency is embedded in a broader socio-cognitive self theory encompassing self-organizing, proactive, self-reflective and self-regulatory mechanisms rooted in personal standards linked to self-sanctions.” Hence, the control for moral behavior rests with the individual. The negative self-sanctions for behavior that contravenes a person’s personal ethics and values stops them from behaving inhumanely. Even in situations when there is sufficient inducement or anticipated reward for doing so.

However, if the self-sanctions are missing or a person does not feel self-condemnation for inhumane behavior towards others, the person will willingly participate in inhumane activities. To ignore self-sanctions, a person gives himself/ herself a moral justification for the inhumane act. They tell the story to themselves that they are acting as moral agents to protect some higher goal by harming others. This is evident in case of riots and religious wars in society. To establish supremacy of their religion or race, they justify harm to people of other race and/ or religion.

In organizational context, it is evident when one victim is bullied by a group of employees for belonging to a certain race, religion, gender, sexuality etc. In such cases, inhumane behavior becomes socially acceptable.

Moreover, besides the aspect on which a person has justified inhumane behavior, a person can still be morally engaged in other aspects. Mr. Bandura states – “Selective activation and disengagement of personal control permits different types of conduct by persons with the same moral standards under different circumstances.” Madoff’s thought process exemplifies it. He is concerned on the suffering of his family members but not of his victims.

Additionally, people are mostly unaware of the changes in their thought pattern and behavior. They start with mild aggression or a small crime and these pricks their conscience. However, gradually they get used to doing inappropriate things and harming others without any self-criticism or loss of self- esteem. The ruthlessness increases and with it the atrocities on the victims. Once this sets in, it is difficult for them to stop without some external intervention as morally they have justified their acts.

The question remains – how are normal people motivated to do atrocities to others? Here are some ways mentioned in the research paper that people use to perpetuate inhumane behavior.

1.    Spreading tales

It is the communication skills of the charismatic leaders who are morally disengaged that influences public to compromise on moral behavior. Hitler’s speeches roused many to conduct the worst possible inhumane acts. Under normal circumstances, the same people may not have done any crime.

The story used can influence many. For example, in the corporate world rumors are spread about employees who maybe on the verge of finding senior management involvement in frauds. The unethical team to damage the reputation of ethics officers and risk managers does a defamation campaign. The facts get buried under the false story and rumors. The ethics officers are portrayed as liars.

2.    Use of twisted logic

Under normal circumstances, a person is unlikely to indulge in inhumane acts towards others especially in public view. Besides self-condemnation, the person will be scared of society’s judgment and boycott. However, to influence a group to conduct a crime, one can give the logic that achieving the goal through legal means is not possible. This logic is used in investigations, where suspects basic human rights are contravened by the police on the pretext that suspect will not disclose the truth on verbal interrogation.

In the corporate world, corruption and bribery are prime examples of it. Many a times organizations consider corruption is justified for conducting business and earn profits even if it means risking lives. As seen in the Common Wealth Games fraud, a bridge collapsed. A few passerby’s died and some were injured. Reason being the material used by the construction company was sub-quality.

Organizations also pay bribes and grease payments using the same logic. According to them, the work or project will get delayed if the organization obtains the required permissions through proper channels. A few organizations in India are also known to threaten physical harm to government officers and their own employees to get their work done and avoid legal channels. Justification is, why bother with legal contracts or proper means. Here the end justifies the means.

3.    Using historical incidents

The saying goes- you are not guilty unless you are caught. This logic is used frequently for influencing people to use inhumane methods to achieve goals. If in a previous situation, illegal means were used to achieve a goal, and the team was successful, the same methods will be used again.

In such situations, the assessment of the situation is biased and the conflicting realities of the situation are ignored. The domino effect of a crime conducted repeatedly in an open social environment is huge, and prone to miscalculations. However, in such situations the sociological impact and the gravity of the situation are misinterpreted.

In corporate world, this occurs when deviant organization culture sets in. For example, X person has conducted a crime and Y is innocent. However, X is not punished and Y is punished. This gives encouragement to wrong doers that they will get away with criminal behavior and the victim will face the brunt of it. If this management laxity continues, slowly more and more staff will turn towards criminal activities. In the long run, the staff will start showing criminal behavior towards the management itself. Hence, the management gets trapped in its own negligence.

4.    Displacing responsibility

The reasoning given by perpetrators of inhumane behavior is- “I am not responsible for it, the senior sanctioned it, and I am just following orders.”  In such situations, the group members will not take responsibility for their inhumane and detrimental behavior towards others as long as some authority figure takes ownership for it. The members will ignore the suffering and harm caused by them to the victim.

Bandura states- “the greater the legitimacy and closeness of the authority issuing injurious commands, the higher the level of obedient aggression. The sanctioning of harmful conduct in everyday life differs in two important ways from the direct authorizing system examined by Milligram. Responsibility is rarely assumed that openly. Only obtuse authorities would leave themselves accusable of authorizing harmful acts. They usually invite and support harmful conduct in insidious ways for personal and social reasons. Through surreptitious sanctioning practices they can shield themselves from social condemnation should the courses of action go awry. They also have to live with themselves. Sanctioning by indirection enables them to protect against loss of self-respect for authorizing human cruelty.”

 Hence, in such situations the victim suffers while the authority figure is removed from direct contact. Therefore, the authority figure doesn’t suffer from self-recriminations for sanctioning humane cruelty and the members who execute the cruel behavior displace their responsibility to the authority figure. This generally takes place in the corporate world when authority figures sanction serial bullying or stalking of a victim to achieve personal goals.

5.    Defusing responsibility

When a number of people are involved in a crime, then no one person takes responsibility for the crime. Each person is doing one small negative act on the victim and the cumulative total impact of the negative actions is nobody’s responsibility. This is primarily illustrated by the cyber bullying that has become prevalent in the present world. Last year a couple of school kids committed suicide due to cyber bullying.

Secondly, diffusion of responsibility is easier on internet as it allows anonymous ids and one can attack the victim through these anonymous ids. Since the real individuals behind the attack cannot be easily identified, they are emboldened to degrade the victim. They may not make the same statements on the victims face since then it amounts to publicly accepting perpetuating heinous crimes.

In organizations when an employee is mobbed the responsibility is diffused since each employee is doing one small act. If the mobbing continues for a long time, then most participants get immune to their own negative actions, suffer no guilt or remorse and consider it an operational function. The activities get routine and their morality is not questioned. Under group responsibility, people are crueller, sometimes competition sets in as to who can be more cruel and none of the members hold themselves personally accountable for their actions.

6.    Disregard or distortion of consequences

If you hear any abuser, be it a perpetrator of domestic violence or anything else, the victim is said to be weak. In cases of psychological abuse and torture, disregarding consequences of one’s behavior becomes easier. The perpetrator states the victim is – making it all up, is attention seeking, a crybaby, can’t deal with the adult world, psychologically weak, can’t deal with pain etc. To distort the consequences of their own actions, abusers give these excuses.

This way they minimize the impact of their own actions so that they don’t have to feel guilty. If minimization doesn’t work, then stories are told to discredit the victim’s pain and suffering. It is easier to harm when the injuries are not visibly evident that is why psychological abuse is so prevalent.

In organizations, as per report 50% of the staff experiences bullying and 5-10% are so deeply impacted that some commit suicide and some never go back to work again.

This can become a wider problem as seen in the financial crises and mortgage foreclosure problems in US. The bankers discarded the fact that due to their negligence a number of their customers had become homeless due to no fault of theirs. Even in the financial crises, bankers failed to acknowledge that their high-risk taking resulted in the crises. The financial crises resulted in job losses of thousands but the perpetrators didn’t consider themselves guilty. On the other hand, a few rewarded themselves with big bonuses.

7.    Dehumanization

The last and the worst method to use are to dehumanize the victim. It is difficult to mistreat friends, neighbors and colleagues, as one knows them. There will be some level of self- reproach and condemnation. However, it is easier to mistreat a stranger since an unknown person doesn’t generate an empathetic response.

Therefore, it is easier to brutalize people when they are viewed as sub-human forms and are degraded completely. If a person is disposed of their humanness, and equated to an animal, then self-censure doesn’t get activated. Hence, the aggression is escalated and continues unabated.

In corporate world, this occurs in autocratic and bureaucratic organizations where the power holders or senior management considers their juniors as less than human. They believe that juniors are there to obey orders and do as they are told. The juniors have no personal desires, life and rights. In such situations, people with authority use coercive power since they cannot be held accountable. As Gareth Morgan in his book “Images of an Organization’ says- that some organizations have a worse culture than Soviet KGB.

To illustrate, Maruti is facing a labor strike, though previously it was known as an employee friendly organization. One of key complaints of workers is that they get just 30 minutes for lunch and two breaks of 7 minutes each for tea/coffee. They are complaining that in an 8-hour shift they sometimes don’t have the time to use the washroom also. Maruti management brought in the changes to increase production of cars at the existing facility.

Conclusion

Bandura says that – “Justified abuse can have more devastating human consequences than acknowledged cruelty. Mistreatment that is not clothed in righteousness makes the perpetrator rather than the victim blameworthy. But when victims are convincingly blamed for their plight, they may eventually come to believe the degrading characterizations of themselves” This is horrifying and unless the victim has a high self-esteem, s/he might believe that they deserve to be treated in a sub-human manner.

Risk managers and ethics officers can find themselves as victims as they fight for what is right and just. They are sometimes punished for their convictions and principles by management. Some bend under the social pressure and some deal with the conflict.

However, viewing it from different lenses, moral disengagement is a huge problem for the corporate world. Self-sanctions and individual moral control appears to be the strongest restrainers for inhumane acts. Hence, we must remember C. P. Snow words when obeying orders –

“More hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than in the name of rebellion.”

References:

  1. Bernie Madoff ‘Can Live With’ Fraud Victims’ Anger, But Not Family Scorn, He Tells Barbara Walters Exclusively

2.  Moral Disengagement In The Perpetration Of Inhumanities by Albert Bandura, Stanford University

Women Risk Managers and Power Games

“Be it known that we, the greatest, are misthought.” By Cleopatra

Recent issue of Business Today magazine named the womanpower in corporate India. My favorite corporate queens were as usual amongst the top – ICICI Bank CEO- Chanda Kochar, Axis Bank CEO- Shikha Sharma and HDFC Executive Director – Renu Sud Karnad. Their success in the financial field is inspiring and one has to meet them to understand their acumen. However, the magazine article – “The Most Powerful Women in Indian Business” started with the following line:

“For generations, the choice between domestic idyll and a career has been the unique dilemma of women”

Yawn!  Uncreative journalists typecast even the most successful women.

Men don’t suffer the same fate. During my teens, my father was a single dad and a Chief Engineer. Dad would have beaten the life out of the person who dared to suggest that he couldn’t do both efficiently. (Psst, I did overhear dad sometimes exasperatedly say to his friends – “Looking after one rebellious teenage daughter is more difficult than managing ten dam sites”. But let us ignore this, I always did.) Alas, if women took such a stance they become supposedly unfeminine.

My perspective is that women entering finance line after doing a chartered accountancy or MBA (Finance) course are already mentally prepared for the roller coaster ride. So, I thought of the real career related challenges female risk managers face in their path to growth. Here are three situations in different stages of career. While I can’t say this is gender specific, men can face similar situations too, but possibility of women facing it is higher.

1.    The Young Professional

At the start of my career, a batch mate of mine, an exceptionally beautiful woman with a razor sharp mind excitedly called me at office. The edited conversation for you:

She: Sonia, at this audit client site I have met X guy. Very intelligent and suave. He came to the auditor’s room and chatted with me for an hour.

Me: Wow, I am happy for you. What next?

She: He invited me for a date.

Me: So are you going?

She: I have started investigating his department.

Me: Shit! Does he know?

She:  No. Whenever I see him, I give a big smile and bat my eyelids.

Carving at Khajuraho Temple

She was right on track. Investigations revealed that he was conducting a big fraud. This social trick has been used on nearly every young female auditor and investigator. Men think they can charm the wits out of women and hide their criminal activities. A woman would be too distracted to pursue her assignment properly. The distraught admirers are incommunicado after issue of the report.

2.    The Mid-Senior Level Professional

Consulting companies hire the better of the lot of experienced female risk managers. A consultant has to deliver high quality consistently otherwise, they will lose the client. Hence, meritocracy prevails in selection and recruitment.

However, the mindset is significantly different in the Indian industry sector. Some companies want to hire not so bright women (or men) as risk managers.  The male managers think that women are more compliant, less assertive and more controllable. Hence, a female risk manager will be more agreeable to their demands if they wish to pressure her.

Quite frequently, business executives want portions of the risk reports deleted and/or altered. They want to hide the inaccuracies, wrongdoing and frauds from CEO/Board. They assume that female risk manager can be bullied easily into a compromise, as she is far more vulnerable than male colleagues are.

Depending on the organization culture and situation, things can get nasty for women. In the Indian environment, unscrupulous business executives can destroy a woman’s personal and professional credibility easily by spreading rumors about her love life.

As India is a conservative male dominated society mindset is that if a woman has two lovers she is a whore, and a man with hundred lovers is great in bed. (Psst, who are the men having affairs with?) Hence, if a married woman is rumored to be having an office affair and her husband hears of it, she sometimes ends up paying a heavy price for it. A single woman’s reputation of independent reporting can be easily destroyed if it is rumored that she is having an affair with office colleagues. Most women risk managers leave their jobs and career at this point. There are only a few sophisticates who nonchalantly brazen out these situations.

3.    The Senior Level Professional

Breaking the glass ceiling with three inches heals is tough for Indian women on the whole and especially for the risk managers. The top order is still a male bastion. Though, a couple of times I have caused cracks in the ceiling, the top job is elusive. The best thing about failures is that they give an insight on the reasons for failure. I learnt a couple of lessons from them.

The men’s club at the top has the most political influence. Unfortunately, even senior female risk managers are not part of the group. Hence, they only get second-hand information of the political games being played. This puts them at a disadvantage in comparison to a male competitor. As he is part of the group, he can make the right political maneuvers. On the other hand, a female risk manager needs a mentor who fights her case with the group.

The second aspect is that if a female is not part of the group, they don’t trust her. In most organizations, a CEO’s direct reports have the most power and they only share it with people whom they trust. They are wary of risk managers as they have access to sensitive information of all departments and can break a few high profile careers. Hence, the CEOs direct reports generally do not approve the appointment of a risk manager who is loyal to the CEO and/or does not belong to their group. That situation makes them vulnerable, especially if they are involved in unsavory activities.

Therefore, a female risk manager succeeds in taking the top slot only when a whole number of situations are in favor of her. Her soft and technical skills are just one aspect which helps her in climbing the ladder.

Closing Thoughts

In India, female risk managers occupy less than 5% of senior risk management positions in industry and consultancy. While the regular gender diversity concerns remain, female risk managers face a few more challenges due to the nature of their job. The dedicated ones continue to persevere and fight the battle. Their passion ensures success.

Again, in Cleopatra’s words –

“All strange and terrible events are welcome, but comforts we despise.”

An Indian Perspective on Affirmative Action

India continues to face challenges relating to caste, religion and gender inequalities. The question is how society creates a more level playing field where there is equal opportunity for all. Indian government has introduced various reservation bills to improve the status of backward classes and women. According to the XI Planning Commission Mid-Evaluation report on Social Justice the government strategy is targeted towards “providing social empowerment, economic empowerment and social justice to ensure removal of disparities and elimination of exploitation”.

The issue discussed in this post is that in light of huge disparities is affirmative action by government the right approach. Would you consider it socially ethical? To put forth my views I am first providing some background information on income disparities and gender inequality problems in India. In the end, I have added Michael Sandel’s lecture video on “Affirmative Action”. It is an hour-long lecture and discusses the ethical dilemmas relating to affirmative action.  

 Indian Social Structure

Amongst Hindus, the Brahmins were according to Hindu philosophy superior to the other three castes. The Harijans/Dalits now called scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward classes were considered untouchables belonging to the lower caste order. This caste differentiation was abolished after independence, however differences in education and financial status continue. Same problems prevail in Muslim community. Not only are Muslims earning lesser, they have lower education levels, and culturally higher restrictions on women. According to 2001 Census scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and minorities consist 42% of the total Indian population.

The income disparities continue to be huge. As per Planning Commission assessment 27% Indian population is below poverty line and in the top 10-world billionaire Forbes list of 2011 there are two Indians, Lakshmi Mittal and Muskesh Ambani. Successive governments have partially succeeded in running various programs for backward classes by reserving seats in educational institutes and government offices. The irony is that lower caste Hindus who adopted Islam or Christianity to get rid of the cursed caste tag, now wish to be classified as Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians to leverage the advantages of reservations. 

Status of Women

India was one of the few countries that in its constitution provided equal rights to women. According to Hindu religion women are avatars of goddesses. In Hindu religion, the three main representatives of God are Lord Brahma, Lord Vishnu and Lord Shiva. Respectively their roles are of creator, manager and destroyer of the world. The devis (goddesses) are Durga, Saraswati and Laksmi. The goddesses bestow power, knowledge and wealth to their followers. Delving in the Hindu philosophy shows that women are considered equal.

In the present scenario, one would assume that Indian women would be in a better position. A few women hold politically powerful positions. Ms. Pratibha Patil is President of India, Ms. Sonia Gandhi is leader of the ruling party Congress, Ms Sushma Swaraj is leader of opposition party BJP and Ms. Meira Kumar is Speaker of the House.  Four key positions held by women, and the Women Reservation Bill is awaiting approval in Lok Sabha for quite some time.

However, we cannot say no progress has been in made. In the last decade a few laws, namely Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence and Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, have been passed. Still the road ahead is extremely difficult. India has a high rate of female infanticide, dowry deaths, sexual harassment and violence against women.  Therefore, Indian women continue to struggle for equality and fight a multitude of gender biases . To offer support and eliminate such extreme disparities in the Eleventh Plan Ministry of Women and Child Development has Rs 56,765 crores (USD 12,549 million) allocated for women welfare.

India corporate sector is doing no better in promoting diversity. The Economic Times article  “Tough climb for women up India Inc ladder” on Women’s Day stated – “A population of 500 million women, but only 258 of them hold some of the top jobs in the country. That’s how skewed India Inc’s ‘diversity ratio’ is….. There are only 16 women on the board of directors of the 30 Sensex companies, or 4.8% of the 335 people who hold directorship positions”

 The Privileged Class View

Most people would proclaim that effective measures should be implemented for uplifting the underprivileged. However, there is a wide gap between words and actions. The good intentions are not followed through as the social cost has to be borne by the privileged class. The socially affluent have benefitted from the legacy privilege and the belonging to the right network.  The privileged classes do not wish to consider that minorities and women need the extra support since they don’t have the right connections. Reservations for backward classes and women have men complaining that they are being forced to sacrifice their individual rights for society’s betterment. The wrongs were done for centuries, so why does the present generation need to pay the price for it.

 There are a number of arguments for and against affirmative action. Watch the video of Michael Sandel’s debate in class about the subject and decide what the right thing to do is? The same problems persist at global level relating to socially weaker communities.

References:

1. Tough climb for women up India Inc ladder
2. Planning Commission Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007- 2012 – Social Justice
3.  Planning Commission Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007- 2012 – Women’s Agency & Child Rights

Tom Peters views on Diversity at Workplace

Business ethics and laws require organizations to ensure equal treatment of workforce irrespective of race, age, gender, color and religion. Diversity and equal opportunity are symbols of good work culture.

Tom Peters states that the biggest untapped markets are of women and retired people. Hence, focusing on producing and selling products to tap these markets makes business sense.  Tom Peters in his book “Leadership” advocated hiring employees from diverse backgrounds to explore the potential of these markets.

His logic is that women make most of the buy decisions of households and/or are the major influencers in the buy decisions. Hence, if organizations hire women, they can produce and package products which appeal to women. This will result in increase in sales and turnover of the organization.

The second unexplored market is of retired people. Old people have surplus income saved. Organizations should produce products catering to the needs of retired people. The older employees in the organization can help in determining the needs of retired people.

 

Tom Peters explains that in the next decade women have the natural attributes to lead. In a survey conducted of “attributes required for doing business in the current economy”, women exceeded in 18 of the 20 attributes checked. Businesses should place women in the board rooms if they wish to grow. Surprised! Watch this video; it will give you some food for thought.

Encouraging diversity is not only ethical; it makes a lot of business sense too.

Poison Ivy In Office

Women in their attempt to gain financial equality have resorted to power plays and manipulation in the same manner as men. Being a woman, it concerns me that socially the injustice which women were fighting against, they now are subjugating their male colleagues with the same in the corporate world. In this scenario the men are becoming victims with lesser options for justice. Women are showing that they are equally capable of abusing power and compromising moral ethics for ambition. An analysis of the results of sexual harassment and office romance surveys indicate these shortcomings in female behavior in office setting.

A sexual harassment survey was conducted by Economic Times- Synovate, in August 2010 in seven metropolitan cities of India. The results revealed that “one in five Indians has been sexually harassed verbally or physically and half of the respondents said that they have been sexually harassed by their female colleagues”. The other startling fact which came to light was that “38% of the respondents believe that men are as vulnerable to sexual harassment as women”.

An office affairs survey was conducted by TeamLease Services- Synovate in December 2007 in India. The results indicated that 59% of working executives feel women are equal partners in office romances and even they initiate affairs a number of times. The second aspect mentioned is that 44% executives attribute ‘ambition-to-move-up-the-corporate-ladder’ as the reason for sexual relationships. Lastly, one third of the working executives from the corporate sector see no harm in romancing married colleagues.

The two surveys indicate the fallacy of Indian women image of being conservative, principled and demure. With permissiveness and materialism increasing in the society, Indian working women in metropolitan cities are using the same tactics as men to succeed.

I hear men complaining about women. They mumble their complaints and say that even their rights to complain against women have been taken away by the feminist movement, as it is considered politically incorrect. Any man saying something against the female gender is considered chauvinistic, jerk, etc. etc.

Men have two images to maintain. First is the traditional image of the strong masculine guy who can take on anything without being emotionally impacted. The second is the recent image of a metro-sexual guy who is broadminded and in favor of gender equality. The two images are contradictory, and somewhere the men are losing out big time without being able to voice their concerns. A study paper published by Jarrod Reich shows men are unable to complain publically because:

1. It is against the masculine image to say that they have been forced into unwanted sex. Men are socially supposed to be interested in sex all the time, so they are considered less of a man if they complain about it.
2. A man is physically stronger than a woman, hence the concept that a man can be forced into sex or raped is not considered believable. The gender stereotype is that only men can rape or force sex on women.
3. Sexual violence by women, for example, manipulation tactics, forcing the issue, stalking a man is considered as the women is romantically involved with the man. However, the same behavior from man is considered a criminal offence.

Both genders are equally capable of abusing the other. The shame, humiliation, anxiety, depression and loss of trust are felt by both genders equally. Undermining the issue, or ignoring the issue does not benefit the society. In times to come, harassment by women might be making headlines. And, that will really be a sad state of affairs.

As per Economic Times survey, at entry level women workforce is 40.3% in India and only 6.2% are at board level. Women have a long way to go to obtain equal representation in the workforce at all levels. The road ahead is tough and if women use the wrong means to reach the goals, they might never reach them. Women as well as men, need to show integrity and moral ethics to achieve their ambition. The road to success is incredibly more satisfying when right choices and means are used to achieve it. I hope both genders will stop their war and build a better society collectively.

I am sure some of the readers would have strong opinions on this subject. Please do share them as it will build awareness regarding the issue.