Risk Managers – Tone Down That Report!

This week three renowned figures – Angelina Jolie, Larry Page and Christine Quinn – disclosed their medical problems to the world. They discussed battle with breast cancer, paralysis of vocal cords, and struggles with bulimia and alcoholism. Jolie, a woman famous for her beauty bared her mastectomy details. They talked about fear of death and handicap, and frailty of human character. They risked high-profile careers by being candid. One word describes their actions – Courage.

However, the corporate world wants to hide behind lies and window dress their weaknesses. The corporate leaders sometimes threaten risk managers and auditors to tone down their reports. The messengers of bad news get shot. Risk managers face bullying, retaliation and threat to their jobs for showing courage to speak the truth. If they refuse to bow down to pressure, the business teams label them as politically dumb or difficult to deal with. Question is – should risk managers tone down their reports to please the business teams?

I want to discuss a couple of scenarios here and you decide the course of action.

Scenario 1- Don’t report correct facts to avoid giving bad news

Let us say, you are a CXO of an organization. You have a heart problem and visit a doctor who is a good friend of yours.

The doctor realizes your heart condition is bad. You require a heart surgery for four bypasses. The doctor doesn’t want to deliver the bad news to you, because he doesn’t wish to hurt your feelings.

The doctor tells you  – “You just have too much stress. You need a vacation to relax and have some fun.” He prescribes you some vitamins and discharges you.

You follow your doctor’s advice, take a vacation. You swim and jog for a couple of days and have a heart attack. You arrive at the hospital with a survival chance of 5%.

Did the doctor do the right thing by not telling you the truth?

Scenario 2 : Don’t report correctly to protect a friend

A civil engineer responsible for doing quality and inspection checks of a bridge notices that sub-standard quality of material is used. There is a high risk of bridge collapsing. However, he issues a clean report to his seniors because the engineer-in-charge of the bridge is a friend of his.

An organisation’s senior managers drive daily across the bridge to reach their office. One day all of them are on the bridge and it collapses. All die.

Would the families of the senior managers be happy with the quality control engineer’s for not disclosing the risks?

My guess is most of the corporate readers would have answered no. You would have preferred the truth when it is a question of your own life being at risk.

Corporate Scenario

So why don’t corporate citizens hesitate when they put other people’s life at risk. See the Bangladesh factory fire, Japan’s nuclear disaster or US banks home foreclosure and mortgage mess. Employees, customers and public lives or life savings were put at risk.

Wouldn’t a few honest risk management reports helped in fixing the problem in time to prevent the disasters?

The corporate world maintains double standards on reporting risks. They want full disclosure of the risks to them but not to others. Before setting these expectations, corporate citizens should answer these questions:

1) Isn’t it a risk manager’s job to identify the health problems of the organization, prescribe a cure, suggest amputation where required and nurse the organization back to health?

2) Is it right to compromise professional ethics and code of conduct to keep a few people happy?

3) Aren’t risk managers responsible for calculating the direct and indirect cost to others for non-disclosure of risks?

4) Shouldn’t risk managers hold their ground and stick to their independent advise as you will benefit from it in the long-run?

Closing Thoughts

Moral courage is one of the most difficult qualities to acquire. Larry Page, as CEO of Google fulfilled his responsibility to the investors by publicly disclosing his medical problems. Now the investors can make an informed decision. One has to admire Page for taking such a difficult call. It takes guts. Disclosing personal weakness makes one feel vulnerable, exposed and fallible. He has shown the path for corporate leaders to follow.

Leadership of Dead Bodies, Stones and Flowers

In April, two Air India pilots handed over the controls in auto-pilot mode to two female cabin attendants to take a short nap. They decided that their sleep was more important at 33,000 feet while flying the 160-passenger flight from Bangkok to Delhi. They returned to the cockpit after 40 minutes when one of the cabin attendants accidently knocked off the auto-pilot mode.

The angry Twitterate asked for pilot’s license suspension, removal from job and legal charges for culpable homicide. Everyone questioned their work ethics and shock at their irresponsible behavior. Air India investigated the incident, suspended the pilots and sated that passengers’ safety was never compromised. Unbelievable, how can passengers be safe without any pilots at the helm?

1.     Double Standards in Evaluating Corporate Leaders

 The pilots were crucified for risking the lives of passengers. However, surprisingly the pilots of the corporate world do not suffer the same fate. The wizards and titans of the banking industry crash landed the world economy, but they didn’t lose their CXO seats.

Look from another lens. Did any senior in Supplier Company or the multinationals lose their job in the Bangladesh factory fire? In Foxconn, the Apple contractor, 11 employees committed suicide, four died in an accident and one collapsed after continuously working for 36 hours. However, Steve Jobs was rated as the second most popular leader by the CEOs in a survey conducted by Price Waterhouse Coopers. The first and third were Winston Churchill and Mahatma Gandhi respectively.

Now this is going to rattle my readers but let me say it. Steve Jobs was a great inventor, designer, strategist and marketer. However, when it came to people, his employees considered him rude and manipulative, and his competitors found him uncivil. Though Apple achieved great heights, he paid low salaries to the employees in the Apple stores, paid no dividends to the shareholders, pushed down suppliers to manufacture at lowest possible rate and didn’t believe in charity or corporate social responsibility. His behavior and actions weren’t people centric or humanity oriented. So my question is – do we consider him a great leader because he managed to put Apple on top? That makes him a great CEO, not necessarily a great leader.

2.     Misconceptions of Leadership

 The problem arises due to the definition of leadership. Read the dictionary meaning:

Leadership is “organizing a group of people to achieve a common goal”.

- We don’t focus on how the group of people were gathered; by inspiring them or arm-twisting them.

-  We don’t focus on the nobility of the goal; was it to exploit others or liberate them.

-  We don’t focus on the method adopted to achieve the goal; was it by breaking the rules or a journey of virtue.

In the present world we see leaders leaving dead bodies in their path, walking over people as if they were stones and sucking the life out of them. Great leaders create leaders not followers, they make others blossom like flowers.

Be it a corporate leader or political leader, we don’t wish to question the leadership methods. Our thinking is, how it matters to us, we have nothing to lose. We have everything to lose, and Martin-Niemöller-Foundation words at Hitler’s time still resonate:  

“First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.”

Our own silence will kill us and the society we live in. When humanity is at stake, can we close our eyes and say nothing is at stake.

3.     Leadership Training

The Institute of Strategic Change reported that – “the stock price of ‘well-led‘ companies grew by over 900% over 10 years, compared with 74% for poorly led companies”. Warren Bennis in 1998 said – “The Truth is that no one factor makes a company admirable. But if you were forced to pick the one that makes the most difference, you’d pick leadership.” However, how many companies train on leadership or do a performance evaluation on leadership qualities?

Quite a few would be saying we do it. So let me clarify. In organizations bosses tell the juniors what to do and how to do it. They give rave reviews to the employee who completes the task as they had stated. They promote that employee and now he becomes a boss. At best, he will be a good manager, not a leader.

Corporate world determines success rate by title and salary.  Neither guarantees leadership skills. Employees aim to become a boss, not a leader. The terms are not synonyms.

According to Malcolm Gladwell,  all outliers practiced their talent for over 10,000 hours to achieve greatness.  In the corporate world, how many hours are dedicated by each employee to learn leadership? Learning leadership is a by-product of the main job, till CEO level. Then isn’t it surprising that we do not have many great leaders in the corporate world.

 Closing Thoughts

Maximum damage in the world was caused by people who got powerful positions without good leadership qualities, be it Hitler, Jeff Skilling, Bernie Madoff or Lance Armstrong. The biggest risks in the corporate world are leadership risks. It is the leaders who make the decisions, so unless we have a system of putting the right people in leadership positions we will continue to have these disasters. Hence, our job is to develop good leaders, select good leaders and continuously monitor the leaders.

 Wishing my readers a Happy Mother’s Day. Being parents is the toughest job in the world,. They are responsible for raising the next generation of leaders.

References:

1. Air India Pilots Story  
2. Deaths in Foxconn
3. Price Waterhouse Coopers report on best leaders

 

Human Rights Risk Management Process

The fire in a nine-story factory building in Bangladesh killed 400 people. More than 600 people remain unaccounted for. It housed five garment factories that supplied to international brands – J.C. Penny, The Children’s Place, Dress Barn, Primark, Wal-Mart etc. The workers were asked to come to work even when cracks appeared in the building the previous day.

Bangladesh is the second largest exporter of clothes and the workers get the lowest compensations. Just around USD 37-40 per month. The question arises why are the multinational organizations not following the UN Guiding Principles for Human Rights protection. The reason is simple; they want to show higher and higher profits to the investors.

In Delhi, in Munirka one will find numerous small factories full of workers making export garments. A friend of mine also ran one. I had bought a few shirts from her at cost price ranging from Rs 300-500 (USD 6-10). In one international visit, I found the same shirts selling in range of USD 15-30. The fivefold increase in price was because of the brand tag attached to the shirt.

The multinational buyers push the prices down and some supplier gives a rock bottom price. The others are forced to match that price to get the business. End result is that basic facilities are not provided to the workers and they work at really low wages. Unknown workers are paying with their lives in developing countries to satisfy the growth targets set by CEOs to earn their bonuses and keep investors happy.  It is the dark side of capitalism which organizations want to hide.

In most companies, human rights risk management is not a focus area. The 2013 Global Risk Management Survey conducted by RIMS identified seven risks related to human resources among the top fifty risks. Though worker injury and harassment were included there was no specific emphasis on human rights risk management.

The risk management team can conduct annually or bi-annually a human rights risk management assessment. It requires attention not only from human resources perspective but from operational, financial, legal and reputational risks perspective. Any breach can result in huge losses.

Here are some of the steps mentioned in the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights and guide “Investing the Right Way” issued by Institute of Human Rights and Business.

1.     Review the Human Rights Policy Statement

Human rights risk management is emerging as an important issue, especially with multinationals entering emerging markets and developing countries. They are expected to protect and respect rights of workers, communities and society. Investors can play a crucial role by influencing companies to promote human rights relating to gender equality, child labor, rights of indigenous people, land acquisition, mineral processing etc.

Hence, companies need to publish Human Rights Policy Statement on their websites. The UN Guiding Principle 16 states –

 “As the basis for embedding their responsibility to respect human rights, business enterprises should express their commitment to meet this responsibility through a statement of policy that:

(a) Is approved at the most senior level of the business enterprise;

(b) Is informed by relevant internal and/or external expertise;

(c) Stipulates the enterprise’s human rights expectations of personnel, business partners and other parties directly linked to its operations, products or services;

(d) Is publicly available and communicated internally and externally to all personnel, business partners and other relevant parties;

(e) Is reflected in operational policies and procedures necessary to embed it throughout the business enterprise.”

As a first step risk managers need to check whether the organization has a human rights policy statement and the above mentioned steps have been adhered to.

2.     Human Rights Impact Assessment

The second aspect of UN Guiding Principles is for companies to establish human rights due diligence processes. Guiding Principle 17 states:

 “In order to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their adverse human rights impacts, business enterprises should carry out human rights due diligence. The process should include assessing actual and potential human rights impacts, integrating and acting upon the findings, tracking responses, and communicating how impacts are addressed. Human rights due diligence:

(a) Should cover adverse human rights impacts that the business enterprise may cause or contribute to through its own activities, or which may be directly linked to its operations, products or services by its business relationships;

(b) Will vary in complexity with the size of the business enterprise, the risk of severe human rights impacts, and the nature and context of its operations;

(c) Should be on going, recognizing that the human rights risks may change over time as the business enterprise’s operations and operating context evolves.”

Human rights risk management is complex and challenging. If ignored, they can increase political risks and deteriorate relationships of the organization with the government. For example, Tata Motors wished to establish Nano manufacturing plant in Singur, West Bengal. The government allocated agriculture land using 1894 land acquisition rule, meant for public improvement projects, to take over 997 acres farmland. The farmers protested with help of activists and the then opposition leader Mamta Banerjee. Tata Motors moved out of West Bengal and established the factory in Gujarat. Multinationals looking for large tracts of land to establish factories are facing similar challenges in India.

Another aspect to look into is that scrap, waste disposal, sewage, environment pollution etc. from factories can impact food, water and health of local communities.

Decision needs to be taken whether investments should be made in countries or states with poor human rights record. In India, the Naxalite area is extremely conflict prone and business operations can have severe human rights impact.

Risk managers should evaluate the strategy and operations of the company from human rights, environmental, social and governance factors. The companies can face operational risks (project delays or cancellation), legal and regulatory risks (lawsuits and fines) and reputational risks (negative press coverage and brand damage). The impact assessment should be done from investors, customers, employees, society and supplier perspective. Identify business owners for the risks and devise appropriate risk mitigation plans to address adverse impact.

3.   Grievance Mechanisms

UN Guiding Principles state that victims of corporate related human rights abuse should have access to judicial or non-judicial remedies. Companies should provide some remedies themselves and cooperate in the remediation process.

UN Guiding Principle 29 states –

“To make it possible for grievances to be addressed early and remediated directly, business enterprises should establish or participate in effective operational-level grievance mechanisms for individuals and communities who may be adversely impacted.”

However, this isn’t followed by the companies in true spirit. “A Vigieo analysis of human rights records of 1500 companies listed in North America, Europe and Asia revealed that, in the previous three years, almost one in five had faced at least one allegation that it had abused or failed to respect human rights.”

Ideally the investors in the company should ensure that grievance mechanisms exist and address human rights issues. The transparency and disclosure of the same in annual reports would highlight the financial, legal and reputational risks. However, the investors don’t seem to be bothered by it.

See the case of Apple. It reported  Gross Profit Margin – 42.5%, Net Profit Margin – 26.7%, Revenue Per Employee – $ 2,149,835 and Net Revenue Per Employee – $ 573,255. It has 43000 employees in US and 20,000 outside US. However, Apple contractors hire an additional 700,000 people to engineer, build and assemble iPads, iPhones and Apple’s other products.

An Apple supplier in Taiwan, Foxconn was recently in the news for its workers attempting suicide. As per reports “Workers are required to stand at fast-moving assembly lines for eight hours without a break and without talking. Workers, sharing sleeping accommodations with nine other workmates, often do not know each other’s names. They do not have much time to get to know each other. The basic starting pay of 900 RMB($130) a month – barely enough to live on – can be augmented to a more respectable 2,000RMB ($295) only by working 30 hours overtime a week.”

See the difference the company earns per employee and the payment made to the supplier’s employees. Apple shows profits at the expense of lives of Taiwanese workers.  The workers don’t have much of a grievance mechanism in China as the government stated that the suicides are within the normal suicide rate. Can Apple investors sacrifice some profit margin for safety and security of the contractual workers?

Another old example is the class action suit since 2001 on Wal-Mart Stores that involved 1.5 million current and former Wal-Mart female employees. It is the largest workplace bias case in US history.

 4.    Human Rights Reporting

 The biggest challenge is that most of the human rights abuses are not reported. The victims of human rights exploitation hold little power in comparison to the exploiters. They can hardly take up the might of powerful businesses when they are struggling to get basic food and shelter. Secondly, in the developing and emerging countries, corruption levels are generally high. Hence, media, law enforcement agencies etc. are bribed by the power players to silence the victims. However, with internet and social media, things are gradually changing. People have a voice and collectively they can fight.

UN Guiding Principle 21 lays out the requirement for companies to communicate human rights impact externally. It states -

 “In order to account for how they address their human rights impacts, business enterprises should be prepared to communicate this externally, particularly when concerns are raised by or on behalf of affected stakeholders. Business enterprises whose operations or operating contexts pose risks of severe human rights impacts should report formally on how they address them. In all instances, communications should:

(a) Be of a form and frequency that reflect an enterprise’s human rights impacts and that are accessible to its intended audiences;

(b) Provide information that is sufficient to evaluate the adequacy of an enterprise’s response to the particular human rights impact involved;

(c) In turn not pose risks to affected stakeholders, personnel or to legitimate requirements of commercial confidentiality.”

 As per the UN principles, the reports must cover appropriate qualitative and quantitative indicators, feedback from internal and external sources including affected stakeholders.

Risk managers can evaluate the reports and the reporting process to ensure that all risks are properly addressed. They should evaluate whether cautionary steps are taken and nothing is being done to exacerbate the situation. They should highlight severe or irreversible risks to the management to ensure appropriate decisions are taken.

Closing Thoughts

 Inequalities in income are the main cause of human rights abuse. The rich want to get richer at the expense of blood and sweat of the poor, and sometimes life. The diamond manufacturers and sellers took the right step to publish that they do not source blood diamonds. Since 2003, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), supported by national and international legislation, has sought to certify the legitimate origin of uncut diamonds. Trade organizations – International Diamond Manufacturers Association (IDMA) and the World Federation of Diamond Bourses (WFDB) – representing virtually all significant processors and traders – have established a regimen of self-regulation.

Other industries, be it technology, electronics or textile manufacturers,  need to come out with similar steps to stop human rights abuse. The risk managers have a vital role to play in it. If we do not do anything, we are cheating this and the next generation of their right to live happily.

References:

1.  Investing the Right Way – A Guide for Investors on Business and Human Rights – By Institute of Human Rights and Business
2. Singur farmland-  Tata Motors conflict
3. Apple financial ratios
4. Foxconn Case Study
5. Diamond industry sales clauses
6. 2013 RIMS Global Risk Management Survey

 

Two Ethics Questions to Mr David Cameron

David Cameron recently visited India with a huge trade delegation to improve the bilateral relationships. Of course, with India’s growing power, world’s senior politicians and business heads are now coming to India every week. However, what made Mr Cameron’s visit remarkable were his two comments he made in respect to British colonial rule.

Though I generally keep away from commenting on political aspects, the hypocritical stance was just too amazing to ignore. Indians sometimes see this behaviour from whites in India. For instance, a British man recently said to me – “All Indians are slaves, we British are superior.” I have no idea on superiority or inferiority of any human race but Indians are definitely not slaves. Obviously, the deluded old chap lived in a different world. Point to note is, Roman traders introduced the concept of slaves to India, and Mughal rulers practiced slavery in India for the first time.

The British rule was an attempt of minority ruling the majority. That is only possible by fear and terror. While Indian rulers believed in servant leadership. British ruled the population in a significantly inhumane autocratic leadership style that Indians did not have much experience in dealing. That resulted in quite a few atrocities and it brings me back to Mr Cameron’s comments.

1.      Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, visited Amritsar’s Jallianwala Bagh and laid a wreath at the memorial. Cameron considered the massacre “deeply shameful event in British history” but did not apologise for it. Before this, Queen Elizabeth had paid a visit to the same memorial in 1997 and laid a wreath. One is not sure what the British leaders are attempting to convey by these gestures.

Here is the historical perspective. On April 13, 1919, British troops opened fire on unarmed civilians, including women and children who were celebrating the Sikh festival Baisakhi at Jallianwala Bagh. The British estimated 379 dead and approximately 1100 wounded. Indian National Congress estimated 1000 dead and 1500 wounded.

The order was given by Brigadier-General Reginald E.H. Dyer. He was forced to retire from army, however was celebrated as a British hero. His actions were so twisted that when an Englishwoman, Miss Marcella Sherwood reported she had been molested on the streets of Amritsar, he issued an order requiring all Indians (men) using that street to crawl its length on their hands and knees. General Dyer said that – “Some Indians crawl face downwards in front of their gods. I wanted them to know that a British woman is as sacred as a Hindu god and therefore they have to crawl in front of her, too.” He was never punished for any of his actions nor was tried in court.

Under British rule, Indians suffered numerous inhumane acts. From the present day British leaders’ perspective, I would say that they cannot undo the past. Indians definitely are not waiting for an apology. However, using the gesture for political mileage, most probably to get Indian votes in Britain in the next election is a little bit too much to swallow.

The other aspects I find hypocritical are the double standards maintained. When Germans killed Jews, it was an inhumane act – “crime against humanity”. The Nazis were tried in Numerban trial and hanged for their war crimes during Second World War. Even until date, a list is maintained of the missing Nazi’s. American President Mr Franklin D. Roosevelt  and British Prime Minister Mr Winston Churchill, both were involved in the decision.

I absolutely agree that Hitler’s rule was atrocious. I have one observation – If atrocities are done on Americans and British it is a crime against humanity. If they do atrocities on people of other countries, then those people do not even deserve an apology.

How does one justify this stance on ethical standards?

2.      The Kohinoor Diamond

India requested David Cameron to return its Kohinoor Diamond and he responded – “I certainly don’t believe in ‘returnism’, as it were. I don’t think that’s sensible.”

Kohinoor diamond was discovered in Karnataka mines and the first mention is in 13^th century. It is one of the most well known diamonds in the world. Presently, it is set the in the British crown of Queen Elizabeth and is displayed in Tower of London.

The British acquired the diamond from India in 1850. Raja Ranjit Singh of Punjab owned the diamond and in his will bestowed it to Jagannath Puri temple. However, on his death in 1839 British administrators did not execute his will. In March 1849, British formally proclaimed Punjab as part of British Empire in India.  In terms of the treaty they mentioned that the “gem shall be surrendered to Queen of England”.  Lord Dalhousie treated it as spoil of war. He made the 13-year-old conquered prince Dulip Singh, to travel to England to present the diamond to the Queen.

India was a rich country when British arrived in the 17-century AD. They took away precious jewels from the kingdoms they captured. Most of them cannot be directly identified; however, Kohinoor is part of Indian heritage.

My question is – Is it ethical for a country to keep other countries national treasures? What if the roles were reversed? What would the world expect from India then?

Closing Thoughts

India is catching up with the developed countries and now ranks 9^th in the world in respect to Gross Domestic Product. Indians are confident of doing better in the 21^st century. Hence, they are not looking for rehashing history, as it can never be changed. Indian religions teach forgiveness as the greatest virtue. However, it does not mean Indians have forgotten the past and are gullible enough to be taken for a ride. Now as more world leaders visit India to take advantage of the large consumer market, they need to do far better. A new world order is establishing and India is in a position to choose the best partners.

References:

1. List of Most Wanted Nazi War Criminals according to the Simon Wiesenthal Center
2. Nuremberg Trials
3. Kohinoor Diamond
4. Britain GDP

Employee Selection and Background Screening in Ancient India

Would it be fair to assume most of us believe that employee selection and background screening processes were formed in the 20^th century? Do you think soft skill evaluation of employees is the latest management mantra? Will it come as a surprise that in India these were formed in 4^th Century BC?

Kautilya’s Arthshastra, written in 4^th  century BC, lays down rigorous process for selection and background screening for ministers, priests and government employees. It is more extensive than that employed in the present-day corporate world. I am doing a comparison of the two below. After reading, tell me whether we have progressed or deteriorated in 25 centuries.

1.      Selection Process

Let us first see the qualities senior level people require according to Kautilya:

“Native, born of high family, influential, well trained in arts, possessed of foresight, wise, of strong memory, bold, eloquent, skilful, intelligent, possessed of enthusiasm, dignity, and endurance, pure in character, affable, firm in loyal devotion, endowed with excellent conduct, strength, health and bravery, free from procrastination and fickle mindedness, affectionate, and free from such qualities as excite hatred and enmity–these are the qualifications of a ministerial officer (amátyasampat).”

If you look at them, he covers intelligence, professional capability, personal character, strategic thinking, emotional intelligence, social and business connections, soft skills and physical fitness. In the 21^st century words and terminologies are different, but attributes are the same. Hence, not much change.

2. Background Verification Process

Now I am giving a table below comparing the two period’s process of background verification. For detailed methodology of the current period refer to my article – Pre-employment Background Verification.

Doesn’t it make you think? Over 25 centuries, the basic concept and process of selection and background verification has remained more or less the same. However, Kautilya’s selection process doesn’t stop here. He mentions a few additional processes and I am amazed at the insight.

3. Detailed Character Verification

In the Arthshastra, Kautilya asks to ascertain the character of employees by offering temptations and instigating them against the king. Senior level ministers and priests should attempt to lure the employee to test him for four allurements- religious, monetary, love and fear. He suggests creating situations to test whether the employee will defy the king for the sake of religion, money, sex or under threat. Then he states, that whosoever is lured by a certain aspect, should not be in-charge of it. For example, if someone fails the test of monetary allurement, he should not be responsible for managing finance. The tests were conducted to ensure that people in critical positions were incorruptible.

In present times, we select senior managers on various aspects but their loyalty and character aren’t as thoroughly checked as in the ancient times. In my view, quite a significant number will fail Kautilya’s tests for “purity of character”. How many CEOs check whether their direct reports will betray them for bribes and rewards?

Closing thoughts

In India, around 25% candidates submit false or inaccurate resumes. The background screening processes aren’t fully established in most of the organizations. With high risks of hiring terrorists, hackers and fraudsters the organizations are susceptible to financial, legal and reputation risks. Isn’t it surprising that even after 25 centuries the process and procedures aren’t fully implemented.

We now say we are living in a fast changing world. So, do you think background-screening processes will become efficient in this century, if they haven’t changed in 25 centuries?

The Indian Management Model

I am asking my readers - Have you heard about the Indian Management Model. If not, then why not? India has a rich history of baniyas (business community) who excelled in trade. India controlled one-third to one-fourth of the world wealth in the classical period (1AD to 1279 AD). So why do we not have Indian management principles?

Indian business schools and colleges teach management concepts formulated by Peter Drucker and Fredrick Taylor. Granted America had a dramatic and glorious history of business growth. However, presently the media headlines proclaim just one thing – American business environment sucks! Indians have made great strides in adopting the American money market principles but shouldn’t we stop and redefine them.

Indians managers may think it is not possible, but Bollywood has taught us it is possible. Yeah, Bollywood has chosen the best of both worlds. Aamir Khan’s Lagaan reached the Oscars with dirty dhoti clad Indians singing, dancing, and playing cricket. Even Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire had a song and dance sequence. Bollywood movies contain high-octane emotional drama, no-brainer jokes, head over heels in love stories, superman fight sequences, songs and dances. Bollywood adopted the Hollywood technology, marketing and financing strategy, and retained the cultural core of Indian cinema. It presented itself to the world in various award functions without attempting to incorporate Hollywood sensibilities and tastes. It is now so popular that even US dance reality shows have with Ballad and Hip Hop, Bollywood dance form.

We need to do the same with Indian management rather than blindly adopting western best practices. Below are some of my rather radical thoughts on how we can do it. Read it and tell me what you think.

1.     Holistic Business

The stupendous success of American capitalism in 20^th century resulted in making the money market model popular. India initially after independence followed socialistic model but after liberalization in 1990s is foraying into hard-core capitalism.

Now, after witnessing the pitfalls American business concept is undergoing change. More and more people are questioning the basic premise that business is for profit alone. People are propagating that business has responsibility to all its stakeholders – investors, customers, employees, suppliers and society. It cannot profit while harming the society.

From ancient times, India propagated the concepts of holistic business. The stories in Indian history repeat the same message. A businessman is required to conduct business ethically and responsibly and has to give back to the society.  Unlike the west, Indian philosophy focuses on balanced life and not the concept that more is better.

Hence, while the west was struggling with high CEO salaries, until recently, India was not having this problem. The Indian CEOs salary increases have occurred in the last 6-7 years. While the western public is protesting against these high salaries, Indians are acquiring the bad habit. The Indian business leaders need to look what they are copying from the western world under the guise of management nuggets, best practices and benchmarks.

2.     Non-violent Competition

Once a friend remarked – “You quote Mahatma Gandhi and profess to be a follower of non-violence principles, but you are always fighting”.

I responded – “When was Gandhi ji not fighting? He fought the British Empire for half his life. He just did it non-violently. He based his fight on humane principles and values.”

We need to introduce the concept of non-violent competition in the business world. The financial crises in the west showed that cut throat completion, aka dog eat dog world results in organizations with dysfunctional cultures. The banking regulators’ reports prove it.

Indian principles of non-violence (ahimsa) state – “do not harm anyone”. It does not say – “do not excel”. Indian business leaders must focus on achieving great heights based on knowledge, ideas, innovation and strategy. They must not focus on running down their competitors through industrial espionage, illegal acts or negative publicity.

The same applies to Indian employees. Excel on merit and not by creating misfortunes for your colleagues.

One thought to keep is – Non-violence and success aren’t two mutually exclusive terms.

3.     Teach Ethics Through Indian Philosophy

When I started blogging, an American blogger gave me feedback on one of my articles – Buddhism in Corporate Life. He said that in US they don’t mix religion with business ethics. Though I understood his point, I couldn’t see how Indians could adopt it. In India, religion is entwined with Indian philosophy in every aspect of life. The values and attitudes of a country’s population define its culture.  We cannot segregate business ethics from the whole piece and teach it in isolation.

The pujas, fasts and festivals of various religions of Indian sub-continent would account for 300 days in a year. There is a moral story behind the folk tales of numerous gods and goddesses. The western world is now talking about “storytelling” to give messages and sell concepts. The Indian mythology did just that. Then why not use it to educate on business ethics?

Let me put it another way. How many Indians would know the Utilitarian Approach of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill or the Rights Approach of Immanuel Kant? My guess is less than 5%.

Now how many Indians have heard of the Hindu philosophy of Karma? My guess is more than 70%.

Which ethics philosophy would be easier to sell to Indians? The one they are familiar with, and connect at emotional and psychological level.

Unfortunately, in India political parties create a ruckus whenever Indian concepts are included in the school course syllabus stating it is favouring some religious group. They don’t object to the introduction of western concepts. We need to stop being apologetic about Indian heritage and proudly learn from it.

4.     Inclusive Workforce

The term “Diversity Management” sends one clear message – “You were not welcome and we are doing you a favour by inviting you”. It applies to women, LGBT group and minorities.

In the last few years, LGBT rights have taken centre stage in the western world. Let me touch a bit of Indian history.  The British in 1862, introduced section 377 of Indian Penal Code prohibiting homosexual activity as British soldiers had sex in the ships travelling to India.

Before British rule, Indians accepted homosexuality without aversion. Homosexuals were not considered inferior or abnormal. In Hinduism context, every person has a masculine and feminine side and the percentages vary in each human. No one is completely male or female. Hence, some pictures depict gods in the conjoined half-male half-female form.

My guess after reading the Da Vinci code is that Christianity propagated the concept of women being inferior to men. Before the Moghul rule in India, Indian women enjoyed equal rights. Hindus pray to their gods along with their soul mates – Ram- Sita, Krishna- Radha, and Shiv-Parvati. Goddesses Durga, Lakshmi and Saraswati represent power, wealth and knowledge. Ramayana and Mahabharata, depict king Ravan and Dhuryodhan respectively, as evil for sexually harassing women.

Before the misrepresentation of caste system in India, a community was defined according to the nature of work they were doing. And not on basis of religious inferiority or superiority.

Hence, in India we need to go back to 1 AD to understand the concepts of inclusive society to develop standards for inclusive workforce.

5.     Social Communities and Soft Skills

The American social concept is that an individual’s needs are superior over family and society needs. However, the Indian concept propagates superiority of family and society needs over personal needs. With nuclear families in the last twenty years, Indian society is transitioning towards American concept, thinking it is better.

Though if you read the latest American management mantras, they talk about:

a)  Building relationships – Transactional relations do not work in the long run, hence the use and discard policy is losing ground. Indians work with business partners after building a relationship of trust and respect.

b) Collaboration and teamwork – Being able to work with teams is a key strength. Employees are rewarded for collaboration. Individual star performers no longer enjoy the prestige of the last decade. Indians work well in groups as they have numerous members in family to cater to and learn in childhood to meet different stakeholder interests.

c)   Service leadership – Arrogance, over-confidence and extravert behavior in leaders is rewarded in America. However, now service leadership or level 5 leaders are valued. Indian leaders, be it Gandhi or Nehru, were known for their humility and service leadership. 

Closing Thoughts

Indian civilization is one of the most ancient civilizations in the world with a very rich history. The Vedas, Arthshastras and various philosophical texts provide a vast reservoir of knowledge on life, business and society. Even Steve Jobs and Beatles got that. Indians needs to go back in time to understand those principles. While the west offers a lot of knowledge, it has been tested only for a century or so and fatal flaws are showing.

Adopting the western principles blindly is not the solution. One of the biggest risks is when a company copies or adopts something without evaluating the feasibility. It holds true for management models also. Choose the best of both worlds and devise a new management model suitable to India.

Money Can Buy Everything

A woman called me up recently and said that someone is willing to pay her huge amount of money for investment in her business. Problem was, they did not want to disclose their identity and would be transferring money from Sri Lanka. I told her I suspected that the people involved are attempting money laundering. She believed the same and refused the transfer of funds.

I realized that the people behind white-collar crime believe one thing – “Money can buy everything”. That is the core motivation. Otherwise, professionals earning huge salaries would not be rationalizing fraud. The American money market economy reiterates this concept; hence, even the normal people are pursuing money blindly. All relationships and every person seem to have a price. So let me ask you the question:

Now let me paint you a picture of the future world. In that world you do not have to produce kids, no woman has to get pregnant and tolerate the pregnancy woes for nine months. Whenever you feel like becoming a parent, you just have to visit a shop. Lifeless kids’ bodies are available of all sizes and shapes. When you choose one, the shopkeeper installs a battery and wham, the kid is alive. You can choose a new-born, a two-year-old etc. at a certain price.

Next, you don’t have to train the child on anything if you don’t want to. You have the option of raising the child the normal way or using patches. For example, if you wish your child to learn cricket, you just purchase a patch and install it, and the kid knows cricket.

Contemplate the advantages of this situation. As a parent, you won’t have to spend countless hours changing dirty nappies and watching the child struggle to learn to walk and talk. Mothers won’t have to sacrifice their professional and social life. You won’t have to sacrifice Dhoni and teams match to watch your son’s floundering attempts on the cricket field. You won’t have to watch your daughters giving a disastrous dance performance. After these, you won’t have to give a beaming smile and make it sound that it was the greatest performance in the world. You won’t have to make any sacrifices. There will be no pain, no tears of frustration and no disappointments. So now, let me ask you a question.

If you have answered that you would prefer the natural way, then the question is why? Why choose hard work, heartbreak and pain over an automatic high quality child? The reason goes back to root of our psychology. Raising a child gives purpose and meaning to the life. When our child does well, we feel a sense of satisfaction, accomplishment and pride. The joy and happiness we get are worth all the tears, heart breaks and sacrifices. Parents put their life on hold for 20 years to raise a child and then the child leaves home to make his/her own life. If you look it from a financial angle, it doesn’t sound much of a deal. Yet, nearly every adult wants to do it.

If I look this from another angle, another basic human need is sex. Hence, according to this viewpoint  prostitution should be legal in all countries (It is illegal in India). There should be no moral judgment on purchasing sex. The question is then why do the people who use prostitutes don’t stay with them? Why do they come back home? Why do most of them go back to the same prostitute rather than try a new one every time? The reason is simple. However good the sex was, it doesn’t give a sense of belonging. Objects don’t give happiness, relationships do. Commoditizing takes away the warmth, peace and happiness.

The same difference applies for money earned through hard work and by frauds. Money earned the wrong way doesn’t give you pride and joy. I think all of us remember our first salary and the sense of “I did it”. The salary was peanuts in comparison to twenty years of studying hard. But we remember the first salary till our dying day.

In my opinion, money can only give a comfortable standard of living and nothing more. We don’t even need money even power, recognition and status. We simply are getting lost in the mad race.

Closing Thoughts

Today is Mahatma Gandhi’s death anniversary, one of the most recognized and respected leaders of the 20^th century. Even in this day and age, his dhoti, shawl and chapel can be purchased in India in less than Rs 1000/-. In President Obama’s inauguration ceremonies, Michelle Obama’s clothes were a topic of discussion. Some would argue that present days leaders need it. I think if Gandhi ji had been alive today, he would be living in less than Rs 20,000/- a month.  We need to re-look where we are heading in the mindless pursuit of money while convincing ourselves that our life in other areas is fine. As Mahatma Gandhi said – “One man cannot do right in one department of life whilst he is occupied in doing wrong in any other departments. Life is one indivisible whole.”

Barclays War on Culture Change

Barclays is again in the limelight due to a damaging report on the deviant culture existing in the Investment division. After LIBOR rate fixing scandal and quick departures of senior managers, trouble is again brewing in Barclays. The COO of Investment banking division, Andrew Tinney quit when it was discovered that he shredded the only copy of a report that clearly stated the bullying culture of the organization. Then the new CEO, Anthony Jenkins discovered when an internal whistle blower mentioned it to him. He sent out a message to staff on culture change. Here are some insights into the story.

1. The Damaging Report on Dysfunctional Culture

Daily Mail story states that the report prepared by Genesis Ventures - “paints a devastating picture of incompetence and arrogance at the bank, showing that executives:

• Pursued a ‘revenue at all costs’ strategy.
• Fostered a culture of fear and intimidation.
• Were ‘actively hostile’ to the idea of compliance with banking rules.
• Presided over a ‘broken culture’ where problems were ignored or buried.
• Allowed the business to spin ‘out of control.”

The senior management intentionally understaffed support functions, was hostile to compliance and attacked those who spoke contrary to senior management views. A senior manager threw the risk management report publically saying – “this is a piece of s***” showing utter contempt and disregard for the same.

The summarization of the report states – ‘The senior team portray themselves as all-powerful and all-knowing… and people chose to disagree with them at their own peril. It is a mentality of superiority which, when combined with other deficiencies, stops the team from tackling their blind spots. When those deficiencies are in compliance, this results in serious issues that no one else has the power to address.’

The bank’s culture has become completely deviant, and it will be a long road ahead for significant change to occur. The problem is that this issue is prevailing in other banks also. They depict the same culture and attitude. Unless we understand why it is occurring and senior managers take sincere steps, nothing positive will happen.

 2. The Psychological Explanation

Western banks are known for their arrogant and aggressive culture. Some view arrogance as a positive trait and humility as a negative trait, while the opposite is true. Stanley Silverman developed Workplace Arrogance Scale to measure arrogance level in the organizations. He stated the arrogant people demean others to prove superiority and competence. However, as per his results arrogant people showed lower intelligence and self-esteem in comparison to their peers. He identified four red flags to identify arrogant behaviour:

• Does your boss put his/her personal agenda ahead of the organization’s agenda?
• Does the boss discredit others’ ideas during meetings and often make them look bad?
• Does your boss reject constructive feedback?
• Does the boss exaggerate his/her superiority and make others feel inferior?

If you link back to the damaging report, the senior management at Barclays showed these traits in abundance. Even during the financial crises, the bankers didn’t feel apologetic and showed no humility. Now, being in such senior positions one cannot say they lack intelligence, however, questioning their self-esteem is definitely a valid path.

In another psychological study conducted by Angela Y. Lee, a professor of marketing at the Kellogg School of Management, it was determined that people with low self-esteem defend the brands more when their favourite brands are attacked. This explains why bankers refused to change and continued their behaviour when under attack during the financial crises.

3. The CEO Message for Culture Change

Deal Book reported that Anthony Jenkins, the CEO of Barclays sent a mail out to the staff with a clear message – “change or leave”. He categorically stated the values – Respect, Integrity, Service, Excellence and Stewardship – to be adopted by Barclays employees. He further added that those who do not change their behavior are free to leave. His words were – “My message to those people is simple: Barclays is not the place for you. The rules have changed. You won’t feel comfortable at Barclays and, to be frank, we won’t feel comfortable with you as colleagues.”

He highlighted that in the last two decades financial institutions pursued profits and compromised integrity and reputation of the organization. He said there is no choice between values and profits. Employees must pursue profits while maintaining values. Evaluation of ethical behaviour will be incorporated in performance appraisal process.

That is a very strong message from the CEO of the organization to transform the culture of the organization. Two questions in everyone’s minds are – will they succeed and how long will it take.

Closing thoughts

Bill Gates had famously said – “The world won’t care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.” Maybe organizations should care about the self-esteem of their employees and their senior management team. Studies have shown that people with higher self-esteem show more ethical behaviour and are less likely to get involved in wrongful acts. The present trend of pursuing material gains at the expense of personal values destroys self-esteem in the long run. Bankers have shown extreme tendencies to flaunt expensive toys to feel good and build a superior image. In all probability, they are caught in a catch-22 situation at a psychological level. It might not be possible to change the culture without addressing the core issues faced by the staff.

References:

1. Exposed: The regime of fear inside Barclays – and how the boss lied and shredded the evidence
2. Identifying the arrogant boss
3. Leave My Brand Alone – Kellogg School of Management
4. New Barclays Chief Tells Staff to Accept Changes or Leave

 

 

Does Change Obstruct Ethics?

The media regularly reports that organizations are paying huge fines for ethical breaches. Politicians, defence officers and CEOs are getting exposed in illicit sexual relationships. It appears that present day leaders don’t feel obligated to show professional and personal ethics. One is forced to contemplate did the world always lack ethical discipline? Alternatively, is it that the volatile and dynamic business and political environment has contributed to the decline in ethical values?

In my view, history has shown that during times of massive change in social and political environment ethical values fall. As the environment stabilizes, ethical behaviour increases. I will give you the reason why I think so. Before that let me share with you this beautiful verse from “The Lines of Experience” written by Je Tsongkhapa over 2000 years back.

Ethical discipline is the water to cleanse the stains of wrongdoing,

And the moonlight to cool the painful heat of the kleshas (disturbing/ angry thoughts),

It makes you stand out from the crowd like a great mountain.

By its force, you can tame all beings without intimidation.

Knowing this, great beings guard like their very eyes

The ethical discipline to which they are committed.

I, the yogi, have practised in this way.

You, who aspire to liberation, do the same!

1. Income Inequality

In the present day, corruption levels are so high that a person who stands up for ethics is considered an idealistic fool. Whistle blowers face high level of retaliation and social isolation. Instead of society valuing an ethical person, it stigmatizes the person. However, if you notice carefully, the corruption scams are bigger in the emerging markets than the developed world. Transparency International Corruption Index shows increasing corruption trend in the emerging countries and decreasing trend in the developed world. In the last decade, population of the emerging countries suddenly enjoyed a better standard of living of which they were deprived of earlier. Hence, the changing business environment has inclined them to pursue financial goals at the expense of everything else.

2. Gender Inequality

Look at the impact of change from another lens. Worldwide women are facing higher levels of physical and psychological violence from men. A recent survey showed that working women face twice the level of abuse than housewives. Why is that so? Reason being that working women are challenging the male domination and supremacy established for centuries. Previously, women were doing as they were told and the housewives are still doing so. However, the working women are torchbearers for change and demanding equality. Hence, they are paying the price. The bias is so clear. Half the world population consists of women and the organizations call hiring women a “gender diversity” initiative.

3. Social Inequality

If you look at racial, social and political equality movements, the picture is the same. The Arab world reported increased violence during  revolutions. In India, the under privileged and lower caste people face dire situations and prosecutions for demanding equality. Even seeing the American history, whites increased violence against blacks after abolition of slavery. Hence, even when the conflict is initially non-violent, violence increases when the existing world order is threatened. Those holding beneficial positions in the old order get combative to continue the status quo and compromise human rights. Corporate sector reflects the same problems. White males ruled the business world. Now women and men of different racial communities are challenging their established supremacy. Can we really expect competitive business leaders to give up a superior position without a fight for the goodness of humanity?

In all the three examples, I have highlighted the compromise of human values when social changes occur. Presently, the world population is facing change at all levels. Global economy is in recession, China is threatening US supremacy, emerging markets will become economic leaders, people revolutions has shaken autocratic rules in many countries, technology has connected the global population and women are taking important roles in society. With the political, social and economic dynamics changing the world, can we really expect higher level of ethical behavior in this decade?

Closing thoughts

Change brings conflict. Unfortunately, human psychology is such that a person holding a different opinion, from a mere opponent becomes a tough adversary to enemy number one whenever our self-interest is threatened. Hence, in this dynamic environment expecting high level of ethics from business leaders is somewhat unrealistic. We tend to isolate business and expect organizations to have higher level of ethical disciple than the society around them. When business is a subset of society, how can business leaders portray values different from society.

Until the new world order establishes, ethics and principles would be put on a back-burner.   This viewpoint is definitely not what the regulators wish to hear. What do you think?

Bharti Walmart India – Internal FCPA Investigation – Part II

The previous post raised more questions than gave answers. In light of the on-going investigation, it is difficult to predict results. However, I looked at the recently released FCPA Resource Guide to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and the Enforcement Division of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. It sets some clear guidelines and mentions earlier cases with similar issues. It is a good read for Indian managers working in multinationals dealing with FCPA compliance requirements. I am sharing below some insights about the implications of the case.

1.      Liability of Indian Employees

As per reports, the CFO and the legal team were suspended during the course of the investigation. If the US Department of Justice decides to pursue a criminal case, these employees can be prosecuted.

Interestingly enough, the Indian managers consider their capability to bribe various government officials to get a job done as strength. One often hears them saying – “Oh, I have a contact; s/he will do the job for X amount of money. Don’t worry about the legal provisions, they can be circumvented.” Since one rarely hears any action being taken by regulators on the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act of India, hardly anyone hesitates to take or accept a bribe.

However, Indian employees working in multinationals have to think twice about paying a bribe to get a job done. The FCPA guidelines are strict. It states – “The FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions can apply to conduct both inside and outside the United States. Issuers and domestic concerns—as well as their officers, directors, employees, agents, or stockholders—may be prosecuted for using the U.S. mails or any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce in furtherance of a corrupt payment to a foreign official.” Hence, even sending mails to US boss or colleague that involves a discussion of a bribe payment can make an Indian employee liable. Considering the provisions, the best policy for Indian employees is to keep their hands clean and follow the legal process diligently.

Another aspect to note is that a bribe does not need to be paid to hold an employee liable. The guidance note says – “Also, as long as the offer, promise, authorization, or payment is made corruptly, the actor need not know the identity of the recipient; the attempt is sufficient. Thus, an executive who authorizes others to pay “whoever you need to” in a foreign government to obtain a contract has violated the FCPA—even if no bribe is ultimately offered or paid.” Hence, Indian management and employees both can be prosecuted on this basis.

2.      Challenges for Licenses

With the opening of the retail sector, multinationals need to obtain various licenses to operate in India. The challenge is getting the licenses according to their business strategy and plan.

For instance, IKEA recently obtained from Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) to invest euros 1.5 billion to open 25 stores in India. However, IKEA was granted permission to open single brand stores for furniture only. It was denied permission to sell textiles, office supplies, food and drinks.

Now the question is, under these circumstances what options will the foreign investor consider? Will they agree to sell products according to permission? The permissions maybe denied for the most profitable lines of products. It may not make sense to sell products with low margins. Hence, they will have the difficult choice of either not entering the Indian market or attempt to influence the government agencies to grant permissions for selling other products. If the second option is chosen, there is a high probability of bribes being paid. More so, since Indian government officials know what will hurt the business venture of the foreign company, they might use denial tactics to coerce the organization into paying bribes. Hence, it is a vicious circle.

A LinkedIn member gave a useful suggestion to curb bribes in the licensing process. Rangarajan Gopalan, Investigator US Department of Homeland Securities in New Delhi,  suggested a single window concept for obtaining licenses in retail industry. If government implements the suggestion, the retail companies will not have to run around 32 different agencies to get licenses.

3.      Partner Liabilities  

In the event of the holding-subsidiary relationship or joint venture partnership, the Indian company can be charged jointly and/or separately.

The guidance note illustrated the implications with a previous case. For instance, “a four-company joint venture used two agents—a British lawyer and a Japanese trading company—to bribe Nigerian government officials in order to win a series of liquefied natural gas construction projects. Together, the four multi-national corporations and the Japanese trading company paid a combined $1.7 billion in civil and criminal sanctions for their decade-long bribery scheme. In addition, the subsidiary of one of the companies pleaded guilty and a number of individuals, including the British lawyer and the former CEO of one of the companies’ subsidiaries, received significant prison terms.”

Hence, if the US company is ignorant of the bribes being paid by Indian employees to conduct business, the Indian employees can face criminal charges and the Indian organization may have to pay hefty fines.

Closing Thoughts

The Indian organizations need to assess their FCPA compliance level and not take the issue lightly. The repercussions of ignoring the issue are huge. The legal and reputation risks can put the company to a great disadvantage. Moreover, the employees must follow the legal process rather than find ways to circumvent it.

 References: 

1. FCPA Resource Guide to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and the Enforcement Division of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
2. FIPB clears IKEA retail store plan