Aren’t Indian companies capable of meeting challenges? Are there weaknesses?

In order to rise to the challenges of an opportunity of this magnitude, Indian companies need to address some key weaknesses in the way they currently operate. Chief among these weaknesses is what I would call an inordinate reverence for hierarchy.

But hierarchy is a natural way for people to organise themselves, isn’t it?

True, and it works well for the maintenance of the status quo. But to innovate and do new things there must be mechanisms in place to temporarily suspend hierarchical behaviour. And the hierarchy itself must also be flexible enough to accommodate changing circumstances and people’s personal growth.

How does hierarchy hinder innovation?

I have seen and participated in the dysfunctional behaviour that happens when Indian companies try to use traditional hierarchical procedures to create new products and expand into new markets. The fear and discomfort of doing new things leads senior managers to make demands and issue orders and even implied threats that only serve to increase everyone’s level of confusion and anxiety.

Middle managers (like I was) who want to keep their jobs become weak-kneed ‘yes’ men and workers blindly follow orders and do as they are told whether it makes any sense or not. Opportunities for innovative thinking become all but impossible. Participation in situations such as this is like experiencing a slow motion train wreck; people can see what will happen or not happen, but no one can talk about it, and people soon devote most of their energy to getting off the train before the final wreck.

Terrifying! Any other lacuna that you notice?

Another weakness I’ve seen in Indian companies is an inability to make plans with enough flexibility to guide project teams through the process of creating something new. Indian companies display a strong work ethic and people work long hours, but hard work alone does not make up for the lack of clear plans to coordinate peoples’ actions. Much confusion and wasted effort results from people not knowing what progress has been made and where to concentrate their activity.

Wouldn’t better planning help?

Rather, a better understanding of planning should help. There is a mindset that believes a plan, once in place, is then etched in stone and must be rigidly adhered to regardless of how events unfold. People fail to understand that it is the final goal that does not change, yet the plan for reaching that goal is a living thing and must change continually based on progress and new realities. Many American companies have this same weakness as well.

Coming to strengths, which is the most important one?

I have witnessed significant strengths that Indian companies can draw upon. The first great strength is that India itself is a real, functioning democracy with an active and articulate free press (the American press often looks passive in comparison). India has a history and tradition of transparency and due process in government that can be applied to the process of granting public infrastructure contracts and regulating performance and payments. This tradition of democracy is a distinct advantage that other developing countries do not have.

Any other pluses that we can bank on?

Another great strength of Indian companies is their ability to put teams of highly trained people onto challenging tasks. They can draw on a labour pool that is perhaps the best trained of any in the developing world. I have felt the surge of ‘can do’ spirit and positive energy that happens when these teams are given a free hand. I have seen levels of creative collaboration and excellence of execution that I once thought Indian companies were not capable of.

More Stories on : Interview | Management | Books

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page