Wednesday 6 November 2013

Rahul Gandhi: Damned if he speaks, damned if he doesn't!


He doesn't give full length interviews, doesn't socialise on social media and critics dub him as a clueless kid; however, Rahul Gandhi’s recent statements offer invaluable lessons in communications - what not to speak and when not to speak 

Damned if he speaks damned if he doesn't. Rahul Gandhi, the Congress vice-president, may have a point here that political commentators complained when he had too little to say and now when he’s talking, they continue to complain. However, his very own actions and words are to be blamed as to why he’s often mocked at and misunderstood. The Gandhi scion has been in active politics for almost a decade now; yet he has shown no inclination to express his views on key policy issues. Rather than entering into debates on real issues and laying out a policy framework, he is apparently more than happy stating, restating the age old problems and yes the various references to his mother - thereby always reminding all of us of his surname and lineage. 

Sample the statements: “Dalits need Jupiter’s escape velocity on Earth”, “Poverty is a state of mind”, “My opinion about the ordinance is that it is complete nonsense. It should be torn up and thrown away”, “India is a beehive”, "My mother came to my room and cried... because she understands that power is poison", or for that matter “If India is computer, Congress is its default programme” and you know exactly why opposition, media and political pundits are emboldened to say that he is a huge disappointment, a clueless kid and at best a diffident politician. 

While the opposition and critics may say that he avoids policy discussions (and they are largely right in saying so), yet towards the fag end of September 2013, for once he did address a policy issue in his by-now-legendary “nonsense” press conference on convicted MPs ordinance. He didn’t stop there, a few days later he followed this with his masterstroke political-physics (escape velocity) metaphor; in short making himself a subject of much mockery. We know the marginalised lot (Dalits, as Rahul Gandhi referred to them at a rally in UP) needs to be empowered, but isn’t the escape velocity metaphor indigestible. No wonder it was criticised left, right and centre. 

Interestingly, whenever he is in a tight spot or perhaps wants to sound more emotional he unfailingly makes a reference to his mother. The recent one being at a rally in Gujarat, post his ‘nonsense’ remark, he said, “My mother (UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi) also told me that I used very strong words and that I could have said the same thing in a nice manner. As an afterthought, I agree it was a mistake to use harsh words but I have a right to raise my voice." Well there is nothing wrong in accepting one’s mistake but it seems the Gandhi scion has made it a habit of being reminded of the same by his mother. 

What perhaps the young Gandhi has failed to understand is that while he unfailingly avoids policy deliberations, and if at all he makes one his timing of the same is grossly miscalculated. His latest impetuous reaction on the ordinance clearly shows a glaring communication as well as generational gap within the party. Let us give him the benefit of doubt; he may not have intended to undercut and insult the prime minister, but this is exactly the message that went out to the electorate. And in politics public perception matter more than reality. For a party that has pinned its 2014 electoral hope on Rahul Gandhi, such statements will only add to the misery. 

While his frustration at times may be well justified, but as a leader he needs to show respect, humility and sensitiveness. The Gandhi scion has rather donned the hat of a party outsider; he needs to be reminded that he is the party vice-president and he should raise his reservations/voice on policy issues when they are being discussed at various levels within the party and the government and not as and when it incenses him. 

As the de facto leader of the party Rahul Gandhi is expected to be its face and articulate its position on several matters, but he has over the years preferred to remain a backroom boy, with a few ill-timed dramatic exceptions here and there. It goes without saying, if you can’t lead or think you have been forced to lead, better quit and give way to deserving candidates. But then, perhaps once again his mother needs to remind him of this and ask him to hand over the reins to the capable and deserving lot. And perhaps, as an obedient son he’ll follow suit. 

Of late, he’s been addressing a number of rallies. Leave aside the content, which is the point of discussion in newsrooms, he’s gradually becoming combative. Here is a lesson for him and future leaders (political as well as corporate) – the product offering / promises need to be fresh with added advantages. It’s good to criticise the opposition’s policies, but the criticisms should be complemented with concrete arguments and must also tell the masses what better you have to offer. A clear cut argument would imply that you have given the entire matter much thought and importance; else it will be seen as mere tantrums and you run the risk of losing all credibility.

Political as well as corporate leaders need to a take a note: tokenism will no longer work; actions need to match the words.




Tuesday 5 November 2013

What's the DNA of the leaders of tomorrow?

Leaders of the future will need a host of new skills and competencies if they are to succeed. What can organisations do?

‘What leadership skills are required for the future? Do we have the leadership to make the transition? How do we ensure that we hire, develop and retain the people with the right skills – intellectually, technologically and emotionally? How can we prepare the next generation of leaders, fast enough and well enough, to meet the company’s strategic goals?’ These and many more of such questions are bombarded at HR leaders once CEOs emerge out of their strategy sessions.

So what do business leaders look for in leaders of tomorrow? Is it intellect? Or is it a set of behavioural competencies? Or is it the ‘know it all’ attitude? What are the key traits that organisations should look for in a potential leader so as to not lose out in the race for innovation, the march to globalization and the war for talent?

According to Hay Group’s Leadership 2030 research the leaders of the future will need a host of new skills and competencies if they are to succeed. It states that leaders of the future will need to be adept, conceptual and strategic thinkers, have deep integrity and intellectual openness. Also the leaders have future must find new ways to create loyalty, lead increasingly diverse and independent teams over which they may not always have direct authority. An interesting observation that the report makes is that leaders will have to relinquish their own power in favour of collaborative approaches inside and outside the organization.

In the light of the Hay Group research report, organisations which see themselves as being ‘built to last’ perhaps need to opt for constant renewal. This implies that leaders must continue to develop themselves and their successors. Chuck Stoner, a Professor of Management at Bradley University in his book Building Leaders: Paving the Path for Emerging Leaders, says “Although new leaders can offer fresh perspectives and innovative ideas, they are often unprepared to handle all the obligations that accompany their new roles.” The question then is how can leaders of tomorrow handle all the obligations? Jim Collins, author and business consultant, in his book, Good to Great, offers a possible solution. He stresses upon the fact that a new leader should first focus on Who, and then on What—getting the right people in the right places on the leadership team, and when the people are in place, then decide what to do.

In a 2011 white paper Future Trends in Leadership Development, Nick Petrie, Senior Faculty, Centre for Creative Leadership, emphasises on four trends of leadership development. The trends are – vertical development, transfer of greater developmental ownership to the individual, collective rather than individual leadership and innovation in leadership development methods. But how will this help? With specific reference to collective leadership, Nick says, “The question will change from, ‘Who are the leaders?’ to ‘What conditions do we need for leadership to flourish in the network?’ How do we spread leadership capacity throughout the organization and democratize leadership?”

Organisations can create the required framework and environment to build future leaders; leaders on their part need to be flexible, collaborative and able to leverage subject matter expertise. The most important aspect however is their willingness to continue their learning. A Mercer & Oliver Wyman (global professional services firms) research paper, What the future demands: The growing challenge of global leadership development, rightly summarises that leadership is not about possessing a body of knowledge but about having the capacity to keep learning and to change and evolve – while staying humble.

Going forward, perhaps what will differentiate potential leaders from the rest would ideally be a mix of specific competencies, passion and above all humility.