Lessons from Tech Mahindra on workplace diversity

What’s Tech Mahindra been up to?

Last fortnight, the information technology company came in for some unflattering attention on social media over issues relating to workplace diversity, and although the final resolution of the matter earned it some credit, the entire episode has many teachable moments for all businesses.

What happened?

A former Tech Mahindra employee made public a letter he had written to the company’s head of training in early September, in which he called out her “bigotry” targeting sexual and religious minorities. He said he felt inspired to write the letter following the recent Supreme Court verdict decriminalising gay sex. That letter went viral on social media platforms, and Tech Mahindra drew flak. The outrage was compounded by a searing irony.

Which is?

The head of training was also Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer!

That’s embarrassing! How did the company respond?

With alacrity. MD and CEO CP Gurnani immediately tweeted to say that the company would investigate the matter, and Group Head Anand Mahindra too offered public assurances of the company’s commitment to workplace diversity.

And how did the matter end?

With a speedy in-house investigation, followed by the dismissal of the executive concerned.

So all’s well then?

Like I said, Tech Mahindra’s post-facto response was swift, and was applauded. But it says something about the failure of in-house checks and balances that such a person, with extreme views on everything from politics to social issues had made it to the top rungs of a global company (as Chief Diversity Officer, no less). And that she very likely torpedoed the careers of several others during her tenure. In fact, given that she was prone to Twitter rants about, among other things, “killing Kejriwal” and about Islam, it’s a wonder the company wasn’t alerted earlier.

Are you saying companies should police employees’ conduct?

Everyone is free to have political opinions, even extreme ones — although it is hard to defend homicidal rants on an open platform. Which is why companies that care about how they are perceived do lay down guidelines for employees’ public articulations on social media platforms. And, yes, to the extent that such a world-view influences employees’ at-work behaviour, and brings reputational damage to the employers, companies have a responsibility to ensure that executives in key leadership positions are not poisoning the well.

By conducting personality tests on executives?

That’s a slippery slope I woudn’t recommend. Personality tests, such as the Myers-Briggs test and the Holland Code Career Test, are occasionally used in workplaces, but such tests have been discredited: they overly stereotype personalities and are sometimes “weaponised” in a way that harms organisational culture. But in this case, the executive’s bigotry was on very public display: the organisation just needed to have its eyes and ears open, and perhaps to have institutionalised an in-house feedback loop mechanism that triggers alerts.

Why is all this important?

There are countless studies to establish that diversity — not just on the lines of ethnicity, gender and sexual identities, but even “cognitive diversity” — enriches workplaces and enhances group outcomes.

As complexity scientist Scott Page, author of The Diversity Bonus and The Difference , notes, “Diverse cities are more productive, diverse boards of directors make better decisions, and the most innovative companies are diverse.” In effect, bigoted executives who impair workplace diversity do the company a disservice.

A weekly column that helps you ask the right questions.

COMMENT NOW