Of friends, followers & countrymen

Western management theory is centred on a style where successful leaders delegate effectively. The followers are thus empowered to take the initiative ‘going forward’.

India is ostensibly different. In some ways it behaves the exact opposite. This is the case that the authors build in the book Managing Across Cultures . The upshot is that Indians like to be actively led. One could even say ‘Indians like to be micromanaged’.

The authors cite empirical research and don’t quite go into the underlying causal factors. But we should ask: ‘Why should it be so?’

This is because of a mindset that mixes up ‘autonomy’ and ‘authority’. Show even a semblance of initiative, or say something that suggests you have a mind of your own – you risk cubicle and career. One learns fairly fast to read the tea leaves on what is expected. And more importantly, to do nothing before a clear signal from the boss. This is pervasive, extending to all levels of the hierarchy.

This single confusion lies at the root of not just management styles, but a number of other acts and omissions we see around us day to day. The government – and political – machinery are even more steeped in this than the corporate sector.

This extends even to the two popular social media platforms, Facebook and Twitter. They have gained a considerable user base this year, helped by access through mobiles. So they add an ‘instant’ element to the self-expression in a context where all are equal. And when this instant variety is stirred up with the autonomy-authority mix-up, things get rather volatile.

As a result, 2012 saw a large number of instances of disproportionate responses to innocent acts of self-expression – and a number of these had a link to expression in the social media. Starting from the Satanic Verses episode at the Jaipur Literary Festival right up to the arrests of the two women in Mumbai for saying merely that the city shut itself down out of fear and not respect. I can think of more: a cartoonist who posted on Facebook, an industrialist who tweeted something … the ‘system’ descended on them with all its might.

It’s also significant that the two platforms use different nomenclatures. This difference underlies the response they evoke, and affects the way people engage with these media.

Facebook calls it a ‘Friend’. Nominally this is a relationship of equals. One is just expressing oneself amongst peers. Twitter, however, labels it as ‘Follower’. At once this builds an imbalance in every exchange or transaction. Now it’s not just a matter of expression – it’s also a pronouncement to the flock. Although these two platforms are ostensibly democratising devices – the fact is that all are not equal.

The platforms stir the pot further, with regular emails on what the Friends / Followers are up to. Even a change or correction to the profile is broadcast as though it’s a new avatar.

This creates a lot of side-effects. All sorts of friend requests appear. It is dispiriting to be even asked by some of those wackos from whose peer group one shuffled away long ago.

But it is ‘Follower’ which is a true marketing masterstroke by Twitter. In fact, there are two masterstrokes. One, it evokes ‘Devotee’. Two, it sets out an arms race on the number of Followers one has. I don’t think anyone compares the number of friends one has on Facebook as some sort of status indicator or a cachet. But ‘Followers’ is different. You need more and more.

Therefore, Twitter is the one where the emotional payoff is easier, despite its 140-character functional limit. Understandably it’s the celebrities, who measure their lives in Devotees, who are the most active and approachable.

There is a flip side too. It’s very demoralising when it transpires that a large proportion of these Followers are fakes.

And now a whole generation of consumers are arriving on to these media and the larger marketplace, who expect brands to not merely show off but actually do something for them on social media, specifically offer customer care. Help lines are pretty much restricted to call centres today. We should see that widen to social customer care in 2013. Presumably a lot of apps would do these, running on social media platforms on a mobile device.

But I think the theme of Authority X Autonomy would take a long time to play out. It recurs in many variations: the blurring of the line between service and servitude, the mental segue from service provider to patron, patronage that discourages personal responsibility … all stem from this. Moreover, it’s embedded in a hierarchically conditioned, caste-riven, gender-imbalanced mindset.

It permeates other domains too: Humour and innovation are predicated in irreverence. And when any irreverence is anathema, however benign it may be really, the best we can get is slapstick as ‘comedy’ and slapdash ‘ jugaad ’ as innovation.

I am optimistic, though. A fever flares up when the antibodies hit the antigen. The clumsy attempts by the State to throttle these media, as well as the backlash of outrage, are good news in that sense.

(B. Narayanaswamy is a Consultant at Ipsos Research, based in New Delhi)

COMMENT NOW