REVISITING MILE SUR MERA TUMHARA

It would be a real challenge to come across an Indian who has not resonated with India's unofficial anthem, 'Mile Sur Mera Tumhara, To Sur Bane Hamara ' that was first promoted on Doordarshan in 1988. 22 years later, the same iconic song that had the entire nation humming to its tunes was revived as ‘Phir Mile Sur…The Song of India.’ Both of them focuses on reconstructing the cultural fabric (in an environment dominated by chauvinism and parochialism) and sends across a positive message of patriotism and unified India.

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Circa August 15, 1988; for the first time ‘Mile Sur Mera Tumhara…” was aired on the then only available channel, viz Doordarshan; and since then for the last two decades the audio visuals of Bharat Ratna Pandit Bhimsen Joshi (reciting ‘Mile Sur Mera Tumhara) and Dr. M Balamuralikrishna at Kovalam beach, Chennai (erstwhile Madras, reciting ‘Isaindhal namm iruvarin suramum namadhakum…) has never failed to mesmerise the listeners. Without an iota of doubt, the song captivated and enthralled the entire generation by showcasing the diversity of India and established the message of unity. It goes beyond saying that the second song of “The Trilogy” (consisting of Freedom Torch- The Spirit of Freedom, Mile Sur and Raag Desh) became the unofficial national anthem of India. Cut the picture to 26 January 2010; the simple eight line stanza (translated into 16 languages) was once again aired in almost all the available channels, albeit in a slightly different format. For once, those who could vividly recall the opening lines sung by Pandit Bhimsen Joshi and M Balamuralikrishna must have been surprised. Surely the legends were missing; but nonetheless the present rendition by none other than Amrita Surendranath and Kailash Surendranath (who had earlier worked along with the legendry Suresh Mullick of O&M Advertising) too deals with the concept of national integration. ‘Phir Mile Sur’ has in it the freshness  that reflects the enthusiasm of modern India, a tune and lyrics that every Indian today can relate to and which would further ignite the passion for India and its diversity. Like its predecessor which used a combination of music and images to instill in feeling of pride in Indians from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, Phir Mile Sur too speaks a common and universal language - that of love for the motherland and its people.

Bhairavi, the raga that is common to both Hindustani and Carnatic classical music, is apparently the common theme in both the versions. While there are many who believe that the original ever beautiful song ‘Mile Sur Mera Tumhara’ replete with the spirit of unity in diversity version was better but nonetheless it is a sheer delight to see the Sarod maestro Ustad Amjad Ali Khan and his two sons Amaan and Ayaan Ali Bangash play the same raga (in the backdrop of the Charminar) spreading the same message of love and harmony. Times have changed, it is true (howsoever sour it may sound) that the generation of today may not be able to recognise the maestros of 80’s and early 90’s; and this perhaps necessitated the idea to reinvent the best patriotic ad till date. In other words the current version is but a rediscovery for today’s younger demographic against the backdrop of the events which have rocked and shocked the nation (26/11 et al). Set amidst the backdrop of the hotel Taj (the centre of 26/11 episode), Big B’s baritone voice serves the purpose well. Commenting on the initiative, Kailash Surendranath, the brain behind Phir Mile Sur, said, “It has been an incredible journey creating ‘Mile Sur Mera Tumhara’ which was a mosaic of so many different personalities from various walks of life and regions in India. Today, we feel the same emotions gushing, after a span of two decades. So many things have changed in India - growth, prosperity, the economic scenario, however, as citizens of this wonderfully diverse country, our feelings for India have only grown stronger and we hope that Phir Mile Sur will further strengthen this bond. ”

The locations, the people, the costumes et al have been successful in reliving the nostalgia. Consider Ustad Zakir Hussain; Pandit Shiv Kumar Sharma and Rahul Sharma playing the santoor (in the backdrop of Qutab Minar), Anoushka Shankar, the ever improving Siva Mani drumming away on water – leaves one and all mesmerized . However, there have been few changes here and there (for matter – the lyrics) which have not gone down well with admirers of the 1988 version. “There is no new patch in terms of contents and execution. If they really wanted to create that nostalgia then they should have kept the lyrics intact and shot it with kids as they represent the future of the nation,” says an ad veteran. The veteran is not alone; a Brand Guru and Director of an ad agency shared similar concern. He said, “The ‘Indian’ feel which binds billions of people through a smartly executed “Mile Sur Mera Tumhara" campaign around two decades back is completely missing in the present “avatar” Phir Mile Sur.” It is indeed true that the present version is heavy on the Bollywood front with 22 of India’s biggest superstars (out of 68 of India’s icons who have lent their support to this initiative) and lacks the participation of stalwarts from the filed of business, science & technology et al. A quick realization that India today is no longer juts about Bollywood and sports, it has got a whole new dimension to it. It does make sense that the new team should have used a new metaphor to represent India. One who has seen the new version would agree that the length of the commercial is bit too long and fails to captivate the viewers.

Once again, one is bound to question whether or not the present version evokes the same nostalgia. Let’s not mince words: To some extent the nostalgia related to 'Mile Sur Mera Tumhara is evoked… it gives an opportunity to revive the old memories through Phir Mile Sur. The lyrics, according to a few, are the positive linkage in the current version. Despite few shortcomings what is worth acknowledging is the fact that each artist speaks of a cause. Phir Mile Sur captures the true spirit of contemporary India and will hopefully also resonate with new generations. The present version, in a way reflects the enthusiasm of modern India, a tune and lyrics that every Indian today can relate to and which would further ignite the passion for India and its diversity... “Mile sur mera tumhara to sur bane hamara…” and this is the essence of both the versions in letter and spirit.

Give rewards & recognition a ‘fair’ chance

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Fairness in rewarding and recognising employees for their contribution holds the key to productivity and employee morale

It is the last few days before the financial year 2012-13 draws to close.  At the workplace there are talks about rewards, recognition and yes the often repeated appraisal. There is inherently nothing wrong with either of these. However from an organisational perspective a more loaded question is, “Are employees being rewarded fairly for their efforts?” What is more important here is not whether the organisation (read management) believes that employees have been rewarded fairly but whether employees think they have been rewarded fairly or not. What if the entire process of reward and recognition is unjust – does it impact the organisational fabric? A number of research points out that reward and recognition programs effect employee motivation and productivity. As a matter of fact employee rewards and recognition are positively correlated with the motivation and productivity. It is specifically herein that the fairness (as opposed to injustice and favouritism) component in rewards and recognition arises.

Off the record chit chat with friends did give me reasons to believe that the reward and recognition process is not entirely just and fair; yet I had every reason to believe that not all is bad, until I read this story. False Glory (http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/false-glory) and its subsequent telecast on CNNIBN is a clarion call on the need to revisit the finer nuances of fair reward and recognition and its impact of employee morale / motivation.  The story dwells on how a senior CRPF officer, a senior Indian Police Service officer and an inspector connived to get themselves nominated for the prestigious President’s Police Medal for Gallantry (PPMG), while sidelining two brave soldiers who were the real heroes.  All this while there is clear evidence to suggest that the senior IPS officer and the inspector did nothing to deserve the award. The story goes on to state that, “the injustice went unopposed for about a year, the overlooked jawans did not raise an objection. They were resigned to their fate, telling themselves that this was how the system worked. They stayed on in the force, but their morale fell. On crucial operations, they lost their will to take any initiative. It affected the morale of other jawans as well.”

The question then is – does the same happen in organisations too? Well seen from an organisational perspective, this perhaps is not a new phenomenon. It’s no secret that the playing field among workers isn’t level in most workplaces. Favoritism and taking undue credit of good works done by juniors is perhaps not new. A survey conducted by Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business found that 92 per cent of senior business executives have seen favouritism at play in employee promotions, including at their own companies (84 per cent). About a quarter of the polled executives admitted to practicing favouritism themselves.

But how does such behaviour impact an organisation and its employees? The fact is that employees who don’t feel they are fairly rewarded are likely to become de-motivated to perform, frustrated, resentful and seek to leave the organisation at the first opportunity. True that with the current economy, this may not happen right away, but while these employees may stick to their current jobs, they will not put forth their best of efforts towards achieving organisational goals. Also, by focusing attention on particular employees, it’s easy to overlook growth opportunities and unique skill sets offered by others. If the yardstick for success has nothing to do with performance then there’s every chance that the organisation may lose good people, if they feel their talents are going unnoticed.

What is the way out? Simply put, managers (or those assigned with the task) must be sincere (and not be manipulative – as in the story above) in deciding as to who should be rewarded and for what. While it makes sense to gather accurate details in highlighting performance and avoiding insincerity in work, it is equally important to figure out who is the actual performer. There may be situations where people are getting recognised for a work done by some other person. It is important to get beneath the surface and identify who has actually performed the job and recognise their effort. This would prevent unfair treatment being meted out to unrecognised employee.

Mind your words…for words are all that you have

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Why is it important to communicate with courage, innovation and discipline...

Sometimes in December 2007, Airtel chose to express itself differently. “Barriers break when people talk…fences fall when people talk…walls crumble when people talk,” is how Airtel communicated its philosophy. For those who were accustomed to the brand’s ‘Express Yourself’ campaign, the new communication was a mere extension keeping in line with the brand’s philosophy. Apart from students of advertising, the ad campaign has lessons as to how to effectively use the power of words to communicate. Be it a mere marketing campaign or an outstanding advertisement, or a powerful sales pitch, or for that matter an electrifying election campaign; what stands out in each case is the ‘power of words’ and yes the tone in which they were communicated. Words, by themselves, have the inherent power to move, inspire, uplift, give hope to the hopeless; on the contrary they can pull apart, demoralize, hurt, deflate, destroy and belittle. Words and how they are communicated are powerful instruments; they can show great wisdom and knowledge or utter stupidity. Communication, as they say is neither easy nor intuitive. True, it’s one of the most important skills that we have, but isn’t it equally true that it is this skill that we happen to screw up the most. Hence, when communicating, care must be taken to speak empowering and positive words; for negative words can trigger the fight / flight / freeze response which further leads to reactive, defensive thoughts and behavior. So much so, organizations have set up ‘corporate communication’ department and have hired PR firms for effective communication with both internal and external customer / shareholder.

Powerful communication in the political arena have  helped leaders build their political careers and have even helped a few swing the mood of the voters on the penultimate day; on the contrary there have been instances of leaders who have had to bequeath their chairs, or have had to bear the unwanted brunt of media criticism when their words are blown out of proportion (in the Indian context Shashi Tharoor and Narendra Modi are two such examples). In the organizational context, there have been instances wherein dialogues between management and employee representatives were unnecessarily prolonged because of the lack of clarity in communicating their stands. Nearly all of management issues arise due to lack of effective communication. Chances regarding misunderstanding and misrepresentation can be minimized together with proper communication system. Depending on the existing organizational dynamics an organization and its lead communicators can choose either of the four communication styles: the listener, the creator, the doer and the thinker. The listener is an effective communicator because he is steady, understands there is more than one way to achieve the same results and is willing to listen to other perspectives. The creator is another effective communicator because he is enthusiastic, creative and skilled in persuasion. The doer is assertive, goal-oriented, verbal and competent in problem-solving. The thinker is analytical, slow to react and contemplative.

Are there returns on investment in effective communication? A communication ROI report, ‘Capitalizing on Effective Communication’ by Towers Watson (2009/10) stated that, "Companies that communicate with courage, innovation and discipline, especially during times of economic challenge and change, are more effective at engaging employees and achieving desired business results." Further the report said that most effective communicators had 47 percent higher total returns to shareholders over a five-year span than the least effective communicators.

The success or failure of an organization clearly depends on how it communicates. If it wants the barriers of misunderstandings to break / crumble, it must communicate. Effective communication invariably depends on the choice of words; communicators on both sides of the table must realize that its words and words alone that they have to either make or mar. 

Business Ethics – more in letters less in spirit

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

The Cobrapost sting shows that banks which claim to abide by ethical standards on papers give a damn to banking norms and are engaging in fraudulent practices

Log on to the corporate home page of banks and you would invariably find ‘Code of Business Conduct and Ethics’. Read further and you would have statements such as, “The Group expects all its employees, officers and Directors to act in accordance with high professional and ethical standards” and “This Code of Ethics / Conduct intends to ensure adherence to highest business and ethical standards while conducting the business…” Well there is inherently nothing wrong with the code or its wordings; it’s only that when such organisations portraying high levels of ethics in business conduct are themselves involved in fraudulent acts. Such incidences, however few they may be, do lend credence to the segment of commentariat who believe that business ethics is an oxymoron.

The recent pan–India undercover investigation by Cobrapost alleges nation-wide money laundering racket being run by HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and Axis Bank.  The sting operation alleges that the bankers, among other things, take cash and invest in gold and insurance products, open account to route cash into banks' investment schemes, don't adhere to KYC norms, stash away black money in bank lockers, and split money into tranches to get it into the banking system without being detected.

The banks on their part, however, assured customers that they have high standards of business conduct and that they are investigating the allegations. Sample ICICI Bank’s official response on allegations made by Cobrapost on money laundering reads, “ICICI Group conducts its business with the highest level of compliance to legal and regulatory requirements. All employees of the Group are trained and required to adhere strictly to the Group Code of Conduct, including AML and KYC norms. We have demonstrated our commitment to this by following a zero tolerance policy towards any violation.” Official responses of the other two banks are on similar lines.

At a time when there is so much of discussion around black money, the sting leads us to question the ethical posturing of these banks and their leaders at helm. The banks in question are led by stalwarts who are all spotless and thus the severity of the case. 

Could such operations be carried out without a nod from the top or is it a case of lack of oversight? If professionally managed banks can engage in such fraudulent activities what about the others? Did the CEO fail to communicate and promote clean and ethical conduct? Is ethics and ethical practices merely a discussion point during boardroom meetings? Does it not trickle down to the lower rungs of the organisation? Do the middle managers and their juniors not share the same conviction that exists at the board level? Does the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics merely exist in letters and not practiced in spirit? While the answers to such questions can vary, the essence is that there exists a gaping ethics hole among middle and junior level managers in India Inc.

For those who have seen the footage of the sting it must be clear that none of the managers asked for any personal gratification. Perhaps it was the need to meet the targets and obviously better performance against their names that made them violate the laws. Many in the know are slyly putting the onus on massive pressure to meet targets and performance-oriented bonuses for the unethical practices indulged in by retail banking executives. Such apprehensions cannot be entirely wished away.  According to ‘India banking fraud survey -2012: Navigating the challenging environment’ conducted by Deloitte, “About 73 per cent of the respondents cited ‘lack of oversight by line managers or senior managers on deviations from existing process/controls’ as one of the major reason followed by ‘current business pressure to meet targets’ and ‘difficult business scenario’ as other two major reasons for increasing fraud incidents.”

Are their lessons to be learnt? Will the banking regulator act harshly or will the banks be let off with a few lakhs of fine? Leave the regulators and allow them to do their jobs; the episode should ideally force captains of India Inc into some soul searching and see to it that the discussion on ethical practices come out of the boardroom and be communicated to the lowest denominator. While it is unthinkable that any of these CEOs would ever promote such behaviour under any circumstance but one thing is for sure that the sting puts under a cloud the reputations of these iconic bankers. As few commentators have put it, these iconic bankers must candidly argue the business case for ethical conduct in every corner of his company and eschew short-term (target based) success for long-term sustainability.

Interestingly out of the 145 companies in the Ethisphere® Institute’s, a leading international think thank based out of New York, Worlds Most Ethical Companies 2013, only two Indian companies are featured. You perhaps guessed it – they are none of the above mentioned banks. Time for the banks and India Inc in general to learn, adopt and practice ethical behaviours from Tata Steel Ltd and Wipro Ltd.

A not so Happy Women’s Day…

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

It’s a day to celebrate; yet the larger picture is lost in oblivion as no one wants to miss out on gesturing empty symbolism... 

Happy Women’s Day - well I haven’t wished anyone a happy women’s day. I understand that many a newspapers are flooded with colourful advertisements featuring insurance to automobile companies and yes the ministry of women and child development, TV channels and radio stations are saluting women with special programmes and e-commerce websites are offering special discounts to the fairer sex. Yes, there are efforts from every corner to make women feel that this day, March 8, is a special one for them. Nevertheless I have not been able to arrive at, as of now, any justifiable reason to wish my female colleagues a happy women’s day. If at all I have to, it may be – a not so happy women’s day.

The front page article in The Times of India, based on a survey commissioned by the newspaper states that 94 per cent of women find Delhi unsafe or very unsafe. As per the findings of the survey 96 per cent of the respondents don’t feel safe after sunset. If you thought that safety issue is more pronounced outside the office premise, then take note – the survey candidly states that 63 per cent feel that their office has no set up to fight sexual harassment. Agreed that these are mere statistics, however the moot point is that post the 16 December 2012 incident such responses are an indicator to the fact that there is need for more when it comes to the society approach towards women. Dedicating a day and merely luring the customer in women via advertisements is perhaps not the right way forward.

Isn't it a blot that just after two and a half months when Delhi gang rape shocked the nation, yet another gang rape in the satellite town of Ghaziabad a few days ago, March 2 to be precise, and molestation of a women journalist just a day before the international women’s day celebration has come to fore. Are not such incidences a reflection of the nation’s inability to protect its women?

How does the corporate world figure out when it comes to women at workplace? While each company may portray themselves as great employers, Defining Success 2013 diversity survey – released on the eve of Women’s Day - conducted by Accenture breaks certain claims.  The survey states that 42 per cent Indian women cited lack of opportunity for growth (learning, increased responsibility, etc) within their positions as one of the reasons for lower job satisfaction while 46 per cent feel they are underpaid. It goes on to state that for 68 per cent of women poor work culture is a top reason for quitting and 58  per cent state their work going unnoticed as a major reason.  A significant 31 per cent of the respondents find their working hours or workload to heavy – well questioning the work life balance philosophy that companies like to preach.

Following the horrific December 16 gang rape and taking a cue from the government, India Inc’s leading industry chambers – Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce & Industry, FICCI, and Confederation of Indian Industries, CII set up high profile committees on women’s safety. For a change the government appointed Justice Verma committee and Usha Mehra committee turned their reports in a time bound manner and the Centre has already issued an ordinance ratifying several amendments to criminal laws proposed by the Justice Verma panel. What is intriguing is that neither FICCI nor CII – both of which had constituted special committees to suggest strategies to ensure safety of women – have moved beyond the drawing board stage. Apparently it seems that constituting a committee on the lines of the government was merely meant to earn a few brownie points.

It is in public knowledge across the world that India is a horrible place for women; nevertheless it is International Women’s Day and in our case it is more about symbolism than real content. It’s a special day, or at least that is what is made out to be, and so be it companies, politicians or even actors – none wants to miss out on the cutesy gestures of empty symbolism.

Are you hiring culture-misfit people?

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap 

Don’t hire solely based on job-fit, do ensure that the candidate in question is not a culture-misfit…

89 per cent of hiring failures are due to poor cultural fit; 46 per cent of all new hires fail within the first 18 months, states a study conducted by Atlanta based research and management consulting firm Leadership IQ. The study further states that 75 per cent of the new hires would succeed if they fit in with the organisational culture. Now this is an eye-opening statistic, which brings to light a valuable lesson: One of the major ways that companies can ensure successful hiring is to pay careful attention to whether the new hire fits the company’s culture. There is no dearth of examples where newly hired, talented senior executives fail pretty spectacularly. It is found that despite their functional capabilities they don’t align with the very foundation of what the organisation as a whole stands for.

Agreed that job fit is an important criterion for hiring but it makes more sense to complement job fit with culture fit. When candidates who seem to be perfect on every level fail, not being aligned to the organisational culture – cultural misfit – can be one plausible reason. The question then is what should organisations do when hiring people?

Trade pundits have often argued that the key in hiring is not necessarily finding people who thrive in uncertainty but rather finding people who thrive in the kind of organisational culture the organisation strives for. The hiring manager or the selection committee should resist the urge to hire people just because they share the same personality traits and background as theirs. In fact they should look for a fit with the organisational culture as assiduously as they sort for experience and skills.

This requires yet another set of question or perhaps yet another round of one-to-one interaction. So how can companies go about adding another layer of questioning to evaluate how a candidate fits their culture? The possible question, apart from the one meant to test functional abilities, could be: Is the organisation’s work meaningful to the applicant? Is the applicant’s value in harmony with the values of the company? Indeed there is a greater likelihood that employees will stay with an organisation where the work feels meaningful. Additionally, when the organisation’s values are in sync with the employee’s values, the employee feels a greater sense of harmony at work.

Do such efforts help? Yes, they do. In fact candidates who are selected on the basis of culture fit, in addition to job fit, contribute faster, perform better and stay longer with the organization. And when hiring managers neglect culture fit, the company and the employee share the burden. Despite being high on technical and functional skills, individuals who are not a fit (in terms of organisational culture) can be toxic to the culture, and when groups of people are hired that lack the necessary fit, it often results in a fragmented or schizophrenic-type culture. Well if you believe that job fit is enough and that culture fit can be imbibed upon by training & development, here’s a caveat: culture fit cannot easily be altered through training and development.

Isn’t it true that in the case of people centered organisations, an employee delivers an experience that is aligned with the organisation’s culture and brand? The bottom-line is that culture matters and hence job fit should be complemented by culture fit when hiring.

How much does 'disengaged employees' cost?

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Not engaged and actively disengaged employees can cost the company and economy billions of dollar in productivity loss

$370 billion. This is approximately the combined GDP of Romania and Kazakhstan. But, according to Gallup's calculations, this is what actively disengaged employees, the least productive, cost the American economy per year in lost productivity.

Interestingly a 2011 study led by Gallup’s Jim Harter concluded that majority of American workers were not engaged in their jobs. The study states that the American workforce consists of 29 per cent engaged employees, 55 per cent who are ‘not engaged’ and 16 per cent who are ‘actively disengaged’. This implies that 71 per cent of American workers are ‘not engaged’ or ‘actively disengaged’ in their work, meaning they are emotionally disconnected from their workplaces and are less likely to be productive. Research findings from Corporate Leadership Council, a member-based advisory company, state that the disengaged employees have a 23 per cent probability of turnover within 12 months, compared to less than a 1% probability among highly engaged employees. Further, disengaged employees cost their employers on average 46 per cent of their salaries in lost productivity.  It is but clear that disengaged employees are expensive.

As I interact with my friends on this subject of employee engagement, the only conclusion that I can draw is that almost everyone starts out as an engaged employee. They say that when they turn up for work in a new organization on Day One, they are excited about getting the job and want to make a contribution. If this be so, then why do the same employees turn out to be ‘not engaged’ or even worse, ‘actively disengaged’?

Are the reasons to do with the lack of investment in terms of money and time on the part of the organisation for employee engagement? If so, then apart from the percentage of payroll that does not add any value, what is the lost opportunity cost? Common guesses would be that the organisation would not have lost customers had the employees been really engaged, the revenue perhaps could have been a lot more, and yes, perhaps a talented employees would not have quit. The last point is interesting, for as Curt Coffman says in his book First, Break All the Rules, “Every day, actively disengaged employees tear down what their engaged co-workers are building.” The ‘actively disengaged’ employees (‘cave dwellers’ as Coffman terms them) also suck the vital life force out of the organization and can ruin the dynamics of a functioning and flourishing team.

Mohinish Sinha, Leadership and Talent Practice Leader, Hay Group India, says, “Disengagement creeps in when employees are not properly ‘enabled’ at work.” He reasons that this could be because – either the employees do not have the tools, technology, information, support, and other resources that are needed for them to be effective; or there are procedural barriers at the workplace that interfere with their ability to get their work done. He makes an interesting observation on role fitment, reasoning that perhaps employees are placed in roles that do not allow them to leverage their skill sets, as a result of which disengagement creeps in.

So what can organisations do? Can organisations increase engagement by buying it? Perhaps yes. A number of organisations offer above-industry-standard compensation and benefits, share options, etc., not realizing that these can only increase the engagement levels to some degree. Researches from Gallup and Dale Carnegie state that engagement has to do a lot with the immediate managers or supervisors. An employee engagement survey conducted by IABC Research Foundation, 2011, concluded that the top two factors contributing to an increase of employee engagement within organisations are individual supervisors (85 per cent) and amount of employee communication (81 per cent). Says Sinha, “Managers must combine engagement (the use of motivational tools), with enablement (the act of providing employees with effective resources).” In fact a lot depends on what managers do, from the day employees join the organisation, which determines whether the employee continues to be engaged or switches off and becomes not engaged or actively disengaged.

Reengaging with Engagement, a 2011 report by The Economist, stated that 84 per cent of senior leaders globally believed that disengaged employees are one of the three biggest threats facing their business. However, only 12 per cent of them regularly worked to address employee engagement.

“Employee frustration is the silent killer of workplace productivity,” says Sinha. Given the loss to productivity, keeping employees engaged makes for a business sense.  Towers Watson, International Survey Research, 2011 found that organisations with engaged employees showed a 19 per cent increase in operating income over a 12-month period, compared to a 34 per cent decrease in companies with disengaged employees. Hay Group’s research with hundreds of companies shows that organisations in the top quartile on ‘engagement’ exhibit revenue growth 2.5 times more than those in the bottom quartile. Moreover, the companies in the top quartile on both engagement and enablement achieve revenue growth 4.5 times greater.

Organisations are open to choose – loss of billions of dollar or increase in revenues and operating income.

Are your employees happy?

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Happy employees are more productive and that translates to better bottom-line, say a slew of research studies

Do happy employees translate into healthier bottomlines? Economists have established a link between workers' happiness and their performance, and say employers should take note. Research conducted by a team led by Andrew Oswald, a professor of economics at Warwick Business School, states, “Happy workers are 12 per cent more productive than the average employee while unhappy workers are 10 per cent less.”

But then what constitutes happiness for an employee? Is it fat pay cheques? Or work-life balance? Or is it endless vacations? According a new Gallup poll, what correlates most closely with happy employees is engaging work. In her book, Make More Money by Making Your Employees Happy, Dr. Noelle Nelson says, “When employees feel that the company has their interests at heart, they will take the company interests to heart.” Gallup quantified the link between employee feelings and corporate outcomes, reporting that lost productivity due to employee disengagement cost more than $300 billion in the U.S. annually.

So, should employers and managers hire people that are more positive and happy?

Studies conducted by psychologists point out that, if happier on a given day, people were not only more likely to come up with a new idea or solve a complex problem that same day, but also do so the next day. This is further corroborated by a separate Gallup study (2010) by researcher James Harter and his colleagues, which found that business unit sales and profits at a given point in time can be predicted by employees’ feelings about the organization at earlier points in time.

In his book Happy Hour is 9 to 5, author Alexander Kjerulf says, “happy employees make the customers happy.” He puts forth the point that when employees like their jobs, customers get better service, and are more satisfied. The correlation makes sense when you consider that employees are usually seen as the face of the company. It is but common sense that a worker who is happy and engaged projects positivity, which customers can detect, whereas someone who is negative, or even just disaffected, can just as easily turn customers away.

So, what can organisations do to make employees happy? In her book Work Happy: What Great Bosses Know, author Jill Geisler suggests four measures: a supervisor who cares (happy employees believe their boss listens to them and actually takes their input seriously); sincere and specific praise and feedback; supportive and fair workplace culture; ways to put new employees off on the right foot.

Geisler further adds in her book that hiring well is also a part of the equation. She suggests that organisations should look for people who are positive in nature, hard-working, and will add to the team.

In the fight for competitive advantage where employees are the differentiator, creating an environment where employees feel happy to be associated with the organisation should be the ultimate goal.

Chidambaram’s three promises, will it solve any purpose?

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

The finance minister has made promises to the women, youth and poor of the country; the success of living up to the promises depends on how well the initiatives are implemented

Presenting a budget just before the election year is not an easy task; especially if you are Palaniappan Chidambaram, a key member of the dream budget team. Given, his image as a reformist – at least to some, the finance minister as always was in two minds – whether to give in to populist demands or to adhere to pragmatism. In his budget speech he did speak of the relation between policy and welfare and sough to make a straight forward and short budget speech. In due course of his budgetary speech, he emphasised upon three faces – and made due promises, offered minor sops to income tax payers but slapped a 10 per cent surcharge on 'super-rich' individuals and corporates, levied an inheritance tax and raised duties on mobile phones, cigarettes and luxury vehicles. While post budget reactions such as ‘damp squib’, ‘cautious, could have been courageous’, ‘lollipop’ etc., are doing the rounds; here is a look at the three promises he has made, and how the future could turn out.

“I wish to draw a picture of three faces that represent the vast majority of the people of India,” said finance minister Palaniaapan Chidambaram in the course of his budgetary speech. The faces he spoke of were that of – woman, youth and poor, precisely in the same order.

To the youth of the country, the finance minister has proposed to set aside Rs. 1,000 crore to extend skill development. He believes, and rightly so, that skill trained youth will give an enormous boost to employability and productivity. To the poor of India, the honourable minster made an assurance that Direct Benefit Transfer, which he believes has caught the attention of the entire nation, will be rolled out throughout the country before the incumbent government’s term expires. And yes, not to miss out on the Rs. 33,000 odd crores of additional grant to MNREGA. Well so much for the youth and the poor.

The real spark in the minister’s speech came in the form of a proposal to set up India’s first Women’s Bank as a public sector bank. The minister’s contention is that there is no bank that exclusively serves women. Thus it makes sense to have a bank that lends mostly to women and women-run businesses, that supports women SHGs and women’s livelihood, that employs predominantly women, and that addresses gender related aspects of empowerment and financial inclusion. To this end the finance minister has agreed to provide Rs. 1,000 crore as initial capital infusion. If all goes well, necessary approvals and banking licence could be obtained by October 3013 and new Women’s  Bank could start operation soon after.

At this juncture it is important to have a flashback; in his budget speech in 2010, the then finance minister Pranab Mukherjee had spoken of granting new banking licence to private players. We are yet to see new private banks. One can only earnestly hope, an all Women’s Bank (by whatever name it goes) does get to see the light of the day as promised, October 2013.

Well, a bank was not all that the minister promised to the women of India. Perhaps taken aback by the horrendous incident that took place in Delhi on December 16 2012, the minister spoke of how the incident has cast a long, dark shadow on liberal and progressive credentials of the country. “We have a collective responsibility to ensure the dignity and safety of women,” he said. So to empower women and keep them safe and secure, the minister has proposed to set up a fund, Nirbhaya Fund, where the Government will contribute Rs.1,000 crore.

Besides the two, the minister also proposed to provide an additional sum of Rs. 200 crore to Ministry of Women and Child Development to design schemes for women belonging to vulnerable groups.

It is this promise the minister made to the women of India that is being debated. It is being argued that an all-women bank, the Nirbhaya fund and an empathetic lecture on the girl child and women belonging to vulnerable groups, are mere measures which at best might only scrape the tip of the iceberg that is women’s development and security in the country.

Talking about the bank – the minister himself in his speech acknowledged the fact that, “Women are at the head of many banks today, including two public sector banks.” The question then is what is the logic of an all-women bank? Howsoever good the intentions may be, neither the minister nor the budget document makes it clear as to how the bank will encourage women entrepreneurs? Is an all-women bank the ideal solution? Will it disburse loans at lower rates or will the savings rates be any higher?

As for the ‘Nirbhaya’ fund, there is a general perception in the social media that the fund will rot in the ministry coffers as lazy bureaucracy would take ages to implement laws and tighten security measures. There are questions as to whether the fund will be used to set up better shelter homes and trauma care centres for rape and acid attack victims? Suggestions from various quarters are that- what essentially women need is development at the grassroot level– one of them being more toilets for women. What women really need is security. A few suggest that the minister could have allocated more funds to increase policing on the streets, as well as more female police officers. And yes, more money for rehabilitation and counselling for victims of physical and sexual crimes such as acid attacks, trafficking and rape, would be a better idea.

In previous budgets too, the concerns of poor and youth were addressed; but women being an integral part of the budget discourse is a novel idea. Those for whom the budget is meant want to know how the funds are going to be used. The minister has made the promises, there are suggestions – some of them can be addressed / incorporated - what perhaps could make or mar the entire effort will be the implementation part. If implementation fails, the budget with its inherent goodness as well as inadequacies will be deemed to be mere populist that fell flat.