Bio Project Final Report I Wala l

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP FOR INDIAN BUSINESS CONTEXT

Indian Institute of management, Lucknow

Project report on

EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP FOR INDIAN

BUSINESS CONTEXT

Under the guidance of:

Prof. Shailendra Singh

Course: Behavior in Organization

By:

Sandip Kumar Sen (PGP31109)

Chaitanya K (PGP31081)

Avhijeet Kapoor (PGP31077)

Kriti Singh (PGP31092)

Srinivas Guptha (PGP31090)

Gupta Prasad Sahoo (PGP31087)

1


Contents:

1 Introduction 3

2 Leadership and Culture in India 4

3 Leadership and types of organization 6

4 GLOBE research in India 9

5 Coercive method of management of Indian Leaders 10

6 Comparison of traits with their American counterparts 13

7 Leadership examples from Indian corporates 16

8 Conclusion 20

9 Bibliography 21

2


Introduction

A leader has to effectively motivate and direct his followers to achieve organizational objectives. Thus,

effectiveness of leadership is heavily dependent on behavior of its followers. So, while the core leadership values

remain same across the world, there are mostly subtle and occasionally glaring differences in the way people

respond to different leadership style. For example: ln countries where people believe in high power-distance

relationship, an over friendly leader who consults his juniors before arriving at a decision will be seen as

indecisive and weak leader. This huge difference in the leadership style is the major reason why business

executives are finding it difficult to build a global leadership pipeline. The succession planning and developing a

pool of leaders who can be moved around different locations in the world in one of the key challenges for an

organization. A study of 30,576 leadership assessments from ten countries has concluded that highly successful

leadership traits vary greatly across countries and cultures, but predictably so. Leaders in emerging markets,

(China and India in particular) are particularly strong in operational execution. These leaders are of the hands-on

variety and lay importance on an individual’s performance. Both cultural and economic factors influence such a

trend. Emerging markets like lndia and China have tilt towards collectivism while developed ones like the US

tend to be more individualistic. In a developing economy, running a business is akin to being in a battlefield. The

success of businesses, more often than not, depends on the individuals running it rather than simply the

business strategy that it has adopted. In such a scenario, a business’s ability to hire and train individuals quickly

who then go on to grow the business, holds it in good stead. On the other hand, in developed countries, with a

mature market and steady growth outlook, leaders are much more focused on strategy and communication and

what can be called, being a “change ambassador”. The companies in developed markets are older, more mature

and often operate on a global scale, thus making it imperative to create a common vision and culture that can be

successfully communicated across the organization. The focus is on the “collective good” and a culture of long-

term thinking is created so that innovation can continue to thrive.

India is one of the most interesting countries for researchers in organizational behavior. More than half of its

population is less than 25 years old. This post-economic liberation generation is much more ambitious, confident

about its future and has lesser regard for the existing rules and norms of society. This is the group of half a

billion people that is going to enter and work in the workforce over the next couple of decades. They will be led

by a group of individuals born in a pre-liberalization era of strict controls, low opportunities and high power

distance relationship. There is an internal clash of two ideologies. So what applies to current working Indians

(Age >30) may not be applicable for the entering workforce. In this project, we are analyzing what are the critical

leadership styles that would work well in Indian context and will remain relevant.

3


LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE IN INDIA

Indian culture is a mix of various beliefs, with both religious and demographic bases. To truly understand the

unity in this diversity, one must analyze it and find appropriate ways to harness it for the greater effectiveness.

Discussing leaders and leadership is a favorite pastime of the Indian people. Be it in the field of politics, where

leaders are regularly described with cynicism, or in cricket, where the changing fortunes of the national team are

blamed on its captain. Another favorite topic and one that’s most relevant to us is that of business leaders –

founder and chief executives of leading firms regularly feature in the news for right and wrong reasons, and

feature prominently in the public consciousness. The symbolic value of leadership is also evident from the

number of statues we see erected across the country of various leaders. This is an important facet of leadership

that we will cover later.

India has been the birthplace of many global leaders. The impressive leadership skills of Indians, historically, can

be illustrated from examples of Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Akbar, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi.

Chandragupta Maurya ruled for nearly 24 years in 320 B.C. and was the architect of one of the greatest empires

in Indian history. He was a fierce warrior, who consolidated several small states into one kingdom. Ashoka, who

was a tyrant leader, had a change of heart after the war of Kalinga and turned to one of the most benevolent

kings in the Indian history. He strongly supported the doctrine of ahimsa, which were later used by another

great Indian leader, Gandhi, during the Indian struggle for freedom from British rule. He became the prime

example of philosopher-king in the global history.

The third example of effective leadership in Indian history is Akbar, a Mughal emperor. He appreciated Indian

society’s complexity and diversity and realized that tolerance towards differences in language, social customs,

traditions, etc. was essential for the survival and prosperity of his empire. He was thus considered an

enlightened and pragmatic Indian leader. Mahatma Gandhi, on the other hand, symbolized a unique style of

leadership which converted materialistic weaknesses to political strengths. He is without any doubt the most

important leader of the 20th century, one who has shaped modern India’s destiny. It isn’t easy to label Gandhi’s

leadership style but visionary, inspirational, charismatic and value-based capture the essence of his impact on

his followers.

Having looked at the different historical leaders that India has been blessed with, we would look at the values

that each individual looks out for. Each and every individual looks out for achievement, recognition,

advancement and growth. Optimal results are conquered by bringing out a confluence of the righteous and the

4


desired. Righteousness in Indian culture is defined and encompasses values, which are invariably cherished by

all.

Some of the most important values in the Indian culture would be as follows:

1. Honor (Izzat)

2. Patriotism (Desh Bhakti)

3. Honesty and Integrity (Imandari)

4. Loyalty (Wafadaari)

5. Competence (Qabliyat)

6. Unity (Ekta)

7. Courage (Himmat)

Indian culture is also authoritative. The social do’s and don’t’s are sharply defined and conformity to them is

demanded in all spheres. There is also an intrinsic need for status and power and hierarchy is defined and

respected. Preference to hierarchy is another typical characteristic; castes system is one instance of this

characteristic. Psychologically, Indians are more comfortable in a superior-subordinate relationship than in a

peer relationship. A superior’s word is always respected and followed. They are expected to make decisions and

these decisions are, most of the times, binding for their juniors.

As individuals, Indians are very dependable, may it be personal or professional matters. Indians have a tendency

of seeking guidance, encouragement and support, even when they are perfectly competent to make decisions

on their own. However, dependence-prone individuals may be induced to work harder, take initiatives and risks

and even, behave in an independent fashion. Indian culture is more affective rather than being rationally

oriented. The need of the hour is change of mind and thoughts and behavior modifications. Young officers

should be able to build expectations in their subordinates to work efficiently and sincerely. There is also a need

for charisma in officers, just like our great historical leaders possessed, so that they can charge their

subordinates emotionally and latter can follow their directives implicitly.

5


Leadership and types of organizations

Traditionally, due to the hierarchical segregation of Indian society, leadership in India has long been associated

with autocratic power. This type of leadership typically involves close supervision of subordinates who

themselves participate to a limited extent.

However, when one delves deeper into the understanding of Indian corporate structures and their dynamics a

different picture emerges. Empirical studies in this regard present a mixed view. Since, leadership is a concept

difficult to define in a single unarguable way, one cannot expect a clear cut or generalized view of leadership in

Indian concept also. However, Indian organizations can be broadly grouped into three types which have their

distinct leadership styles.

Family managed traditional organizations

Family as a social group influences Indian business sphere in a major way. Here, head of the family is also head

of the organization. The style followed is primarily autocratic. Heirs are promoted as next generation leaders

without much consideration regarding the skills, abilities and stability of the organization. This has a tendency to

make the organization more centralized and less participative. There is also the existence of paternalistic

outlook by the head of the organization. The high sense of ownership (propriety business) and power in terms of

relationships over family members who participate in the business makes the attitude highly paternalistic. This

style is usually suited in the organizations during their incipient stages. But, in Indian context there seems to be

inheritance of such styles in many organizations.

Professionally owned Indian organizations and foreign-owned organizations

Fortunately the way Indian organizations have traditionally been managed is changing. There has been

permeation of participative and democratic leadership into Indian organizations. As more and more Indian

business leaders and organizations get exposed to the modern approaches to management, there is a significant

shift towards more democratic and participative leadership styles.

6


Public sector organizations

Public sector organizations have high amount of baggage in from India’s colonial past. The bureaucratic culture

that is prevalent in Indian public sector organizations influences the existing leadership styles. The leadership is

based on status differentials, class distinctions and interpersonal relationships which work against participative

style.

Indian Leadership styles

Indian corporate ecosystem offers a potpourri of elements which is unlike anywhere else in the world. To survive

in such a complex ecosystem, leaders in India tend to have certain qualities which set them apart from leaders

anywhere else in the world. Indian organizations have people from heterogeneous backgrounds working in a

dynamic environment which different leadership styles thrive.

But one must understand that there is no pure leadership style and leadership styles usually exists as an

amalgamation of different styles. Even these styles are used on case to case basis. In a country like India

adaptability is one of the most desired abilities in leaders.

7

Action Oriented LeadershipLeader believes in completing the taskGoal oriented and guiding characteristics

Dynamic LeadershipLeader is adapting, fast acting and quickSuitable for environments which are changing and evolving

Transactional LeadershipTransact with the employees to achieve organizational goals Good for meeting short term deadlines and objectives

Transformational LeadershipTries to transform the characteristics of the organization and employeesInculcates values and develops them over the long term

Innovative LeadershipLeader is imaginative, creative and future orientedEmployees participate and give suggestions

Knowledge Based LeadershipLeader has high information content and uses analysis and conceptual understandingBecoming increasingly important in the big data world

Empowering LeadershipLeader acts as an enablerContinuously encourages subordinates to develop leadership abilities - creates future leaders

Participative LeadershipMost democratic style of leadershipGives sense of contribution to employees as the leader uses compassion and empathy

Executive LeadershipStrict, disciplined and structured form of leadership which has instructional and fear oriented elementsLeader is formal, task oriented and professional in outlook

Charismatic LeadershipPersona style and charm of the leader inspires the followersLeader inspires emotions in the followers

Sharing LeadershipLeader divides powers equally amongst the team matesEncourages contribution from the subordinates based on responsibility sharing

High-Tech LeadershipLeader uses technology to leverage his/her skillsEvangelizes the use of technology to increase efficiency and productivity

Spiritual LeadershipLeader uses moral and ethical high ground to guide the subordinatesInspires righteous attitude amongst the subordinates

Green LeadershipPropagates natural and environmental friendly means amongst the followersConcern for the ecosystem is prevalent


Indian Leadership qualities and contexts

Pal and Kapur (2011) have analyzed data and claimed that the following leadership qualities are the most

desirable in Indian leaders:

Firstly the leader should have the capacity to handle the International Business Leadership – should be

able to communicate and express his/her vision and strategies.

Secondly, in the context of Indian Business Leadership the ability to coordinate amongst heterogeneous

groups of people and motivate them becomes paramount.

Thirdly, in context of the public sector companies and governmental organizations being ethical

organized and public welfare oriented becomes important.

Fourthly, while considering the leadership for the Service Industry which acts as a pillar for the Indian

economy – competitive orientation, professionalism and dynamism is required.

In case of leadership for the High Growth & Competitive Industry – adaptability, risk appetite and vision

is required.

Administrative Leadership is gradually becoming a big area in which apt leadership qualities are desired

– ability to take decisions in a holistic and organization orientation are important considerations in this

regard.

Leadership for military and paramilitary forces – strict, disciplined and protocol based leadership is

valued in these spheres.

Role of leaders for research and development, scientific and technological institutions in vital. Creativity,

dedication, enabling ability and motivation are the traits that are valued in the leaders in these

institutions

The context of leadership in pedagogy – qualification, knowledge and conceptual understanding are few

of the prerequisites that have loon been considered indispensable for leaders in the sphere of teaching

Woman Leadership is gradually coming to focus a more and more women stand at the helms of

multinational and multi-billion organizations, Assertive, strong and creative women have carved a space

for themselves and brought pride for India.

To be able to lead the young generation leaders require non-conformist thinking and open mindedness.

In order to act in leadership roles for aged and the elderly one has to have respectful, patient and helping

demeanor. Empathy is one of the most valued trait in this respect.

8


GLOBE research in India

A GLOBE research study was conducted in India. This consisted of focus groups, interviews, media analysis,

literature review and questionnaire-based data collection. A total of 3 focus groups were conducted, two in

India and one in the United States. Most felt that leadership was a “higher level” function than management.

The common descriptions of “leadership” included “having a vision”; a wider, yet clear, perspective of things,

and an objective or a goal. Effective communication and taking risks were also considered as pivotal to great

leadership. Many described leaders as “knowing the pulse of the people”.

Political leaders were considered different from business leaders by most participants. While the former were

considered to be “self-serving, clever and exploitative”, the latter were seen as charismatic visionaries,

particularly within the context of their respective business organization.

Two general conclusions were reached on Indian leadership styles. Firstly, that the most successful leaders need

to be flexible and need to tailor their leadership style based on the situation. Secondly, there seemed to be a

preference for an assertive, proactive and morally principled style as compared to a more reactive and

pragmatic one. Leaders are expected to bring in change and drive action. Communication and providing

direction were seen as the most important functions of a leader. Leaders are also expected to stand for values

such as “righteousness, dynamism and innovation”, and act as role models for the members of the organization.

In the Indian context, leaders are widely respected and looked up to in society.

9


Coercive method of management of Indian Leaders

Lack of flexibility on part of managers in terms of adopting various leadership styles may cause a big deterrence

in keeping the employee morale high. A research conducted by Hay Group, a global consultancy management

firm, brought into light issues concerning these. Now this method of management has its own advantages,

where in you have a better control over your followers in periods of extreme crisis or change. But this also

entails that you constantly interfere with your subordinate’s works ensuring they are following each of your

instructions word to word. The other disadvantage of this style of leadership would be that you are more likely

to criticize your employees on where they are going wrong rather than praising them on occasions where they

have got it right. In reality most of us look for this little praise, a pat on the back or a seal of approval from our

supervisor. So to begin with there is severe lack of flexibility due to the fact that most Indian leader are only

employing one leadership style which is not very inspiring for employees. But to top it off the choice of this

singular style of coercive leadership is nothing but leading to an erosion in innovation. In India especially it was

found that more than two third of managers follow a coercive method of management. The result was that

more than 70% people leaders created a demotivating atmosphere for their employees as opposed to the world

average of 55%.

However these are not the symptoms of India alone. The statistics provided by the research study clearly shows

that in Europe, Middle East and Africa the Managers are least flexible as only about one fifth of them manage to

bring in the recommended 4 styles of leadership into the professional sphere. This is leading to a demotivating

environment in almost three fifth of the cases which is of course less when compared to the global worst of 66

percent found in Asia. When only one fourth have mastered the concepts of multiple leadership styles and

about half still only go by the singular method of coercive leadership expecting better results would of course be

a pipe dream. North America in such instances showed a better reading as less than half of its employees find

work environments demotivating.

At a global level the situation is one third is to one fourth for managers who have failed to adopt any or just one

(usually coercive) method of leadership compared to managers who have actually mastered the art of bringing

in all recommended four styles of leadership along with more into the working environment. Now it is this

method of being flexible of tailoring the approach to suit a situation which leads to good leadership and a

motivated workforce. The results across world is also not surprising with 55 percent work places suffering from

leader induced demotivating environments as opposed to the mere 19 percent managers who have actually

generated efficiency and high performance from their employees.

10


When people works under a good leader not only do they feel motivated and energized they tend to contribute

and also care more to the needs of the organization. A leader plays the biggest influence on whether working in

a team becomes pleasant or it is a less productive unit. When leadership styles are not apt it has the negative

effect where instead of going for the extra mile one sees frequent absence and a genuinely disinterested work

force. Considering the various economic crisis across world in recent years it is rather a very alarming situation

to be in where leaders are finding it difficult to create environments for their subordinates to flourish.

Nurturant-Task Style vs Authoritarian Style of Leadership in

India:

Bringing the discussion to the Indian Context we find that task characteristics is not as important in Indian

organizations as compared to other countries. We can attribute this to a cultural preference where in work in

itself may not be valued as much as it is in the context of a relationship. A leader will be respected, obeyed, liked

and his/her higher status will be readily accepted by subordinates when he/she becomes a benevolent figure

who supports and cares about them beyond the realms of what is defined by the rule books of the organization.

Catering to the subordinates’ personal as well as social needs along with nurturing and guiding them towards

their professional growth is a sure short way of becoming a well-respected leader or boss in India. However to

become effective one ought to frequent and maintain these interaction in such a way that a high level of

commitment and productivity can be cultivated from all involved. Now there is a clear reciprocal relationship

between the leader and the follower established here. In the beginning stages the dependence on the leader is

more but as grow you seek more responsibility and growth opportunity. If the leader can identify these altered

needs over time and not only reduces his instructions and control while affording more autonomy, the

subordinates do feel more encouraged. All these while the affection blended personalized relationship still exists

and this leads to the creation of a very organic group which is autonomous where distinction between the boss

and employee gets minimized with time. However the situations to keep an eye towards should be that the

participative style should be allowed to grow into the equation of these relations. If the leader finds it harder to

let go of the supervision approach of earlier periods there is fear of him/her eventually turning into an

authoritarian figure as beyond a certain period of nourishment each subordinate would look for some degree of

autonomy and growth.

When in a favorable condition an authoritarian also bestows affection and care. So critics do point this out when

it is mentioned we are culturally more attuned towards a nurturant-task method of leadership which according

to the critics is nothing but a façade to cover up an underlying authoritarian stance. Hierarchy, discipline, power,

11


structured relations etc. do exist in India, but there are no unequivocal evidence to suggest that Indian culture is

authoritarian in nature. The need of an Indian subordinate to seek a boss beyond the contractual compulsions

would always encourage a NT method of leadership. There would always be some overlap between

authoritarian model and NT model, but whether this need for structure in NT style leads to secondary

authoritarianism is open to debate. One conclusion can be reached at is that NT model is the way to start a fresh

relationship in Indian context and utmost care should be taken to ensure during the secondary stages the

relationship evolves into a more participative one so as to be beneficial for the organization as a whole.

12


Comparison of traits with their American counterparts

The cultural traits displayed by Indians are quite different from those displayed from Americans. Thus, it is

important for leaders to tailor their learnings, which have often been taken from an American context, and

adapt it to the Indian context. By looking at research that compares Indians and Americans based on Hofstede’s

framework, we can get a broad picture of the differences between each culture and how this has an impact on

leadership.

Hofstede’s cuIturaI dimensions:

Geert Hofstede proposed 5 cultural aspects that affected a society’s members and their functioning. This was

based on a worldwide survey conducted between 1967 and 1973 on IBM employees. This framework is useful

for comparing differences between cultures and the role of these differences in cross-cultural communication.

Hofstede identified 5(initially 4) cultural attributes based on which cultures can be analysed. Let’s look at these

and what the research says on the difference between Indians and Americans along these dimensions:

Power distance: This is a measure of the expectation and acceptance that power is distributed equally. It was

found that Americans expect power to be equally shared while Indians do not.

Individualism versus collectivism: This is the degree to which people prefer to act as individuals rather than as

part of a tightly knit group. It has been found that Americans rank high on individualism while Indians rank much

lower. This implies that Indian employees value working in groups far more than their American counterparts,

who value individual contributions a lot more.

Masculinity versus Feminity: A high masculinity rating for a society implies that men dominate society and

different roles are assigned to men and women. A high feminity rating means that women and men are treated

equally in all respects. Indian and American societies rate fairly high on masculinity to similar degrees indicating

that they are similar in the levels of responsibility assigned to women. Recent debates on increasing diversity in

the workplace, especially in top level management, are an indication of the existing trend.

Uncertainty avoidance: This is a measure of how accepting the people of a culture are of uncertainty and

ambiguity. Both Indians and Americans are relatively low on uncertainty avoidance. This indicates that

13


employees in these countries are more accepting of uncertainty and more willing to accept change and take

risks.

Long-term orientation versus short-term orientation: This measures a society’s devotion to traditional values. A

culture with a long-term orientation looks towards the future and values thrift and persistence. A culture with a

short-term orientation looks towards the past and present and values tradition. India emerges higher on long-

term orientation compared to the US, and this is evident when we compare the general tendencies of the

managements of Indian and American companies. Indian companies tend to favour more stable and long-term

thinking to run a company, while American companies tend to be more bottom-line focussed.

The above factors give us an overview of the cultural differences that arise when we change geographies and

this becomes especially important as companies expand across the globe and set up offices in different

countries. A leader in any of these countries must be aware of these cultural tendencies so that he can get the

best out of his employees.

The Indian Ieader:

Keeping the above factors in mind, we can deduce the ideal qualities of a leader in an Indian context.

The following would be qualities that are likely to be seen in a great leader in an Indian context:

Authoritative: Due to the high power distance index for India, employees would likely expect a leader

that’s more authoritative and dominating. This also means that the approach would be more top-down

in Indian companies.

Collectivistic, team-oriented: Due to high levels of collectivism in Indians, an Indian leader must be team-

oriented and value the contributions of a group more than that of an individual.

Masculinity: Since India shows a higher masculinity rating, we would expect that the majority of Indian

leaders would be men and this is seen to be true. This is not necessarily an ideal scenario since gender

diversity plays an important role in the workplace. Research has shown that companies with women

represented on their boards performed better than those that didn’t. Thus, it is important that we move

away from this “patriarchal” system of functioning.

Traditional, long-term thinker: Indians value tradition and stability and this is something that is

important in Indian leaders as well. They must focus on the long-term functioning of the company rather

than focussing on aggressive short-term measures to boost the bottom-line. It’s also important that the

leader respect existing traditions of the company such as its treatment of seniority versus fresh blood

and so on.

14


Flexible to change: Indians, while traditional, also rank low on uncertainty avoidance. This implies that

they’re willing to tolerate uncertainty and are flexible to change. Thus, a leader should be able to take

advantage of this and must not be too rigid in his style. The willingness to exploit this trait by ingraining

risk-taking and adapting to change in the organization would greatly help the organization.

The ground realities:

We discussed some ideal or expected traits for a leader above but the research shows findings that aren’t as

favourable. Leading Management Consultancy firm Hay Group found that a majority of Indian business leaders

follow a “coercive” leadership style and that this is demotivating employees and thereby affecting the overall

performance of the organization. It was found that around 62% of Indian leaders use a coercive style of

management compared to a global average of 37%.

It was also found that Indian business leaders primarily used a single style of leadership, rather than being

flexible to the changing needs of the situation and that this was holding back organizations. Adaptive leaders are

able to create a better “climate” in the workplace which helps employees thrive.

Thus, it is evident that Indian leaders have some ground to cover when it comes to honing their skills to become

more effective and successful in an Indian context.

15


Leadership examples from Indian corporates

Vineet Nayar, the head of HCL has revolutionized the concept of employee engagement. In his own words he

has destroyed the office of CEO. He has led change towards company’s bracing motto of “Employees first

customers second”. He has taken the transparency and empowerment to new levels by asking the employees to

rank their bosses all the way up to the CEO level. He always has something extra to take out from his hat. This

time he surprised everyone by posting the feedback he has got for him on the company intranet and set an

example to others.

You can strike off this example saying vineet nayar is an outlier. But this the attitude that is behind the success of

the company which made it a 24 billion dollar company with 55 thousand employees and continuously beating

the market trends and analysts’ expectations. If you clearly observe the pulse in the Indian corporate market

people like Vinnet Nayar are ubiquitous and similar leadership style is the norm. So what is it that behind this

unique style of leadership?

As an HBR article “Leadership lessons from India” observes: In 98 interviews of the business heads of the most

coveted Indian companies like TATA Steel, Birla, Reliance, Infosys, Mahindra & Mahindra etc., a very interesting

fact has emerged. All these leaders have given the skill of their employees as a main reason for their success. But

if you take their western counterparts the answers mainly comprised of the management’s skill to excel in

financial markets, strategy, mergers and acquisitions and deal making skills

You may that it is the attitude of leaders in expressing their views, after all who doesn’t believe in their

employees’ strengths. But that ground realities in India show a very clear picture corresponding to importance

given to employee skill. Here in India the employee training is given a very high priority. The western

counterparts think twice before spending a penny on employee training as they consider it as a sunk cost as

there is always a peril of losing the employee. But in India the approach is rather aggressive. They see that

building the skills of employee as a way to retain employees and boost their confidence in the organization.

These developments are happening at a time when the attrition is at a very high level when compared to

markets like US.

Even though India’s foray into these competitive scenario is relatively new these company leaders are adopting

well established practices like business largesse – a commitment to the society it is part of .One such example is

project Shakti where HUL has used the concepts of micro finance to empowerment o reach the remotest and

16


economically challenged places of the subcontinent. There are other initiatives of similar kind undertaken by

hospitals, insurance companies etc.,

Defining Leadership: Indian StyIe

The survey results of HBR also showed another stark contrast among Indian leaders and their western

counterparts. This time it is regarding their key responsibilities. This is how the ranking looks like for the Indian

ones

1) Sketching Business Strategy

2) Custodian of Organizational culture

3) Inspiration, guide , role model for the employees

4) Caretaker of the investors and lenders’ interests

This has come as a surprise to the surveyors as they could not imagine a US organization without having the

investors’ interests as their foremost objective whereas it couldn’t find a place in top 3 responsibilities of Indian

leaders. Don’t even think that these companies don’t face the pressures of stock markets. Many of the

companies we are talking about are not just Indian share market’s darlings but also are blue chip stocks in US

markets. The time spent by us leaders in the last five years comprised mainly of handling external factors like

regulation and shareholders. Main strategy decisions are left to profit center heads but in India majority of

strategy decisions are thoroughly monitored the leaders. Many of these leaders feel that investors’ confidence is

a result of the top 3 things mentioned above rather than an independent factor which needs to be handled

separately with a special focus. It takes a lot of guts for the western leaders to adopt such a style of bold

leadership.

Motivating EmpIoyees

Motivating employees is a very crucial part of leader’s duties. There is great divide in the styles of

Indian leaders and others. Multifactor leadership questionnaire, most frequently used tool in US to understand

leadership style yielded very interesting results. While western leaders are “Transactional” in motivating

employees where the Indian Leadership style is primarily about “Transformational’ style. Transactional style is a

quid pro quo style of motivation. Let’s say when the boss links promotion with the sales target for the

employees. Transformational style is making the employees own the organization and its goals. An example of

this kind was frequently mentioned by US president Lyndon Johnson. When he has asked a truck driver at NASA

to describe his work, he has replied that he is helping in putting a man on the moon. This concept is what

organizational behaviorists call “task significance”. When you make your employees internalize the goals of the

17


company and are able to associate their work to company’s goals it becomes simple to get best out of the

employees.

Transparency and AccountabiIity

Software giant Mind tree posts the ethical failures of its employees on the company intranet. How

have the employees falsified information regarding their prior experience, how have the employees produced

fake bills to encash some allowances, how have some executives bribed some customers to get contracts, many

such instances and how they were shown exit doors. This kind of Leadership shows how much does

transparency and accountability mean to them irrespective of the cadre of the employee.

Empowering empIoyees through communication channeIs

TCS leaders have created a system named “U and I” where in employees can flag tickets just like

those in assembly line. These flags may be like “my boss sucks” or “I am not satisfied with my bonus” and the

issues are resolved through arbitration.

The former head of Maruti udyog jagdish khattar quotes a very interesting fact with HBR: “throw

issues at employees and they will come at with solutions that are 85% of the time what you have in your mind

and they will go back with 100% satisfaction and even if you have something completely different in your mind

you can use your experience to make the employees arrive with your solution all by themselves ( a subtle

manipulation). Now implementation becomes very smooth and quick as you have transformed employees into

entrepreneurs and they will own the problems and solutions give their best to implement it as they can own the

entire problem-solution-implementation set”

A similar strategy was used by Anil k. Khandelwala to rescue Bank of Baroda. BOB was considered

as a socialistic relic in the post reform India. The employees who have been there from ages are reluctant to

change. The bank was overshadowed by highly efficient private banks and it was on the brink of extinction. Enter

khandelwala and the situation has turned around. He has met the branch managers and has shown them the

reports of market analysts and how they have asked their clients to stay away from BOB stocks. Of course no

one wants to work for an organization which has a very bad image in the society. He has asked for suggestions

from the managers. They have come up with solutions that were similar to what khandelwala had in his mind.

Tough Initiatives like prolonged work hours without extra pay were implemented very easily as he made the

employees themselves utter them.

18


Can the Indian way be repIicated in other markets?

Is the unique style Indian Leadership riding the wave of Indian economy boom or does it have a real essence?

Only time can answer this question. But there is clear evidence of real effectiveness of Indian way of Leadership.

Indians who are leading organization in other countries are implementing these styles and reaping the benefits.

When the world has recognized the essence in US and Japanese way of leadership what’s wrong in giving a try to

Indian leadership styles. It’s not going to be a cake walk to shun the existing cultures and adapt a new one. But

as it is said change is the only permanent thing.

19


Conclusion

There are a few common factors that a multinational company can keep in mind while choosing leaders for its

Indian business. He needs to have an ability to coordinate amongst heterogeneous groups of people, respect for

power distance relationship and hierarchy and tolerance for uncertainty. A leader needs to adopt a collectivisms

style of involving deeply with group members and team and have a more personal level interactions while

maintaining authority so that groupmembers see leader with due respect. However, one size fits all approach

cannot work in leadership in Indian context and business leaders need to be sensitive to the minute differences

arising out of heterogeneity.

The leaders need to be aware and adopt for the following followers:

- Type of companies: PSUs, government organizations, family managed business, private companies and

multinationals have different organizational style and culture and there is huge variety in the mindsets

of employees in them. So what will work in one type of organization may not work for other.

- Age of employees: There is a huge difference in the mindset of employees who have been raised in

either pre-liberalization era or post liberalization one. A leader needs to be more flexible and more open

minded to deal with the highly ambitious young workforce who have a high sense of entitlement.

- Social background: Although India is a single country, there is a huge diversity in the cultural and social

background as one moves from North to South or East to West of a country. Some cultures are more

entrepreneurial while others are more methodological. Also, the economic class of an employee

determines his mindset. A person raised in a poor economic environment may give more weightage to

wages while a person from more well to do family may give more weightage to learning and

achievements.

20


BIBLIOGRAPHY

BS Reporter (2013) '70% Indian leaders create demotivating climate for employees: study', Business Standard, 5th April

Jagdeep S. Chhokar (n.d.) Leadership and Culture in India: The GLOBE Research Project, India: Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

Jai B. P. Sinha (1984) 'A Model of Effective Leadership Styles in India', International Studies of Management & Organization, 14(2/3), pp. 86-98.

Peter Cappelli, Harbir Singh, Jitendra V. Singh, Michael Useem (2010) Leadership Lessons from India, Available at: http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/leadership/leadership-styles-for-indian-organisations/25800/ (Accessed: 25th August 2015).

PTI (2013) 'Majority Indian business leaders follow 'coercive' leadership style', The Economic Times, 4th April

Saibal K. Pal, Vijay Kapur (2011) 'Exploring Unique Corporate Leadership Styles in India', Opinion, 1(1), pp. 75-87 [Online]

Smriti Chand (2015) Leadership Styles for Indian Organisations, Available at: http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/leadership/leadership-styles-for-indian-organisations/25800/ (Accessed: 25th August 2015).

Susan Schrage-Law, Masood Sami (n.d.) Leadership Style of Indian Managers: A Comparative Analysis, UK: Southern New Hampshire University.

21

Documents

Bio Project Final Report I Wala l