Draupati Vastraharan and Corporate Characters

Let me describe the specific scene in Mahabharat first…

Dharma has a temptation to play the Game of Dice and on invitation from Dhuriyodan, he sets out to play. He loses all his material possessions, then he pledges his brothers, then himself and then finally pledges his wife Draupati. He loses her too due the wickedness of Sakuni. At this point, I do not want to discuss if Dharm had rights to pledge his brothers and his wife--I will keep it for a future discussion!!

Now that Draupati is won over, Dhuriyodan, orders his brother Ducchasan to bring her to the open court and strip her of her dresses. Ducchasan drags her by her hair and starts to strip her. She prays to Lord Krishna who promptly helps her by his magic act done REMOTELY (the saree that she wore keeps growing and growing). Finally, Ducchasan is fed up, tired and gives up.

The whole episode happens in the court led by Duriyodhan’s father, Dhirudhirashtra. The court also has Bhishma, Vithura, Karna, Dhuriyodan’s brothers, Kripacharya, Drona and many others.

No one raises an objection, except Vikarna, Dhuriyodan’s much younger brother. He objects very strongly and he is asked by Dhuriyidan to get out of the court. He leaves promptly, feeling angry and helpless!

Bhisma, Vithura, Kripacharya and Drona close their eyes and repent silently. After Ducchasan gives up, Draupati asserts herself and asks very valid questions, directly to the king, Dhirudhirashtra. Being moved by her emotions, the leader, Dhirudhirashtra grants her a lot of goodies. She is not keen to take any favours and asks for releasing her husbands and their weapons.

The above scene correlates to many corporate houses today. The leader is “Visionless” (like Dhirudhirastra!) and has his own biases (like Dhirudhirashtra’s bias for his son). He is unable to oppose whatever his son does!

In many corporate houses, we do find Visionless leaders with their own “blue-eyed boys”… There are many seniors who know what is right and what is wrong, but they choose to keep quiet and watch the happenings mutely. Some may choose to “keep away” and justify to themselves that they are not party to the injustice, since they were away!! They regret and repent, within themselves, without explicit objections, at the right time.

Some juniors in the ranks demonstrate courage and state brutal facts and they are promptly sidelined.

Some people, who are unconnected to the corporate decisions, get victimised (like Draupati). Many such victims seek “external” support. The people who can help (like Lord Krishna), choose to “stay away” and help—without getting into the court of madness.

Everyone gets into a mode of revenge; the root cause can never be identified. Like, Karna behaved badly, because Draupati rejected him albeit he as the first one to lift the bow during her Swamvara. Dhuriyodhan was insulted by Draupati in the Magic Palace; She calls him a “Blind Man’s Son” when he fell down in the Magic Palace. Both Duriyodhan and Karna takes their revenge in the court. Bhima vows to kill Ducchasan in a very barbaric manner. Arjun vows to kill Karna. Nakul vows to kill Sakuni.

The funny thing is that NO ONE vows to punish the silent seniors, who had the formal role, freedom and responsibility to stop the madness, but stayed action-less!! They went scot free!!!

This happens in many corporate houses, wherein there are many seniors who are competent enough to undo a wrong decision or bring in a new policy, but choose to keep quiet (due to their own insecurities), harming the entire company and specifically the unconnected victims!!

The Visionless Leader is also, many times, spineless in taking tough decisions; he also chooses not to consult the experienced ones, BEFORE action. There are many Sakunis who play a lot of political games and influence the key people for their own gains/personal agendas. Many senior leaders get influenced by such political games.

Dhuriyodhan, who has limited formal authority, takes many decisions in the court; this is true in many corporate houses too… wherein the “blue-eyed-boys” take many decisions without authority, since the formal leader is Visionless and is biased. Some times, such people are wrongly referred to as being in “fast track”!!

Gandhari, wife of Dhirudhirashtra, comes to the court and fights for Draupati, She doesn’t have any formal powers. She questions the Adharma and pleads for justice. People listen to her due to her astounding credibility and moral character. But, she makes very little impact, overall!

It is actually an interesting exercise to do a Root-cause Analysis for the Mahabharata war!! One may not know how far back one needs to go to identify the root cause!!

Before the stripping act, Dhuriyodhan sends a messenger to Draupati; she sends him back with questions and he goes up and down a few times just carrying messages from one to another!! There are many such senior managers in corporate houses, who just act as a relay station between the top management and people down the line. They take no real responsibility, but ends up gossiping in the coffee-room!!

Finally, not all victims take injustice lying down! Some ensure that the whole kingdom is brought down—like Draupati did!!

Vibheshan or Karna (Commitment or Loyalty)?

In my previous blogpost, I had shared my thoughts about “Commitment” being over-valued than competence. In this blogpost, I am discussing Commitment, as I understand.

Commitment is to a cause (or Dharma), whereas Loyalty is to a person or organization.

Today, many corporate houses talk about Customer Loyalty, Employee Loyalty etc… Loyalty is also rewarded much more than Commitment.

I feel strongly that Commitment has to be nurtured more than Loyalty.

I am taking a few pages from our epics Ramayan and Mahabharat to express my thoughts…

In Ramayan, when Ravan abducted Sita, Vibheshan (Ravan’s brother), felt it was against Dharma and decided to act. He was fully committed to Dharma.

He took the right actions and in the right sequence too…

• He approached Ravan directly and requested him to return Sita to Rama. (first step: direct feedback)
• Finding no results, he talked to Ravan’s wife Mandodari, and requested her to talk to Ravan. (next steps: approaching influencers)
• Finding no results, he then spoke to Ravan’s sons.
• Finding no results, he approached the Council of Ministers and asked them to influence Ravan. (next step: approach formal roles, who are duty-bound to offer feedback)
• Then, finally, his commitment to Dharma overweighing, he left Lanka and joined Rama, where he found Dharma. (finally, when all else fails, take a firm stand and act)

Without Vibheshan’s commitment to Dharma, Rama could not have won the war; given that Vibheshan shared very critical information about Ravan and his team, at different times; like information about Ahi/Mahi Ravan, or during the final encounter, sharing about Ravan’s boons etc… (Never allow emotions to interfere with your actions that are attached to Dharma)

Quite unfortunately, in our culture, we value Loyalty much more than Commitment. We have branded Vibheshan as a traitor—no one names ones son as Vibheeshan, in our culture!!

In Mahabharat, Karna was Loyal to Dhuriyidhana. He sided with Adharma, knowing full well about the Dharmic principles. His Loyalty to Dhuriyodhana was also not complete! He promised his mother that he would not kill anyone other than Arjuna—not a fair promise to make, being on the other side!!

Many of us seem to value Karna in high-esteem than Vibheshan!! I am perplexed on our stand-points!!

In my consulting experience, I have come across many Corporate Leaders who prefer Loyalists than people who are actually committed to the Vision/Mission as set by the Board. These committed people, rock the boat, express opposing points of view vocally, stick to high personal standards on matters of ethics etc., at different times and are also victimized at some point—whereas, Loyalists get away with accolades by merely supporting their bosses!!

Time to think for ourselves as Leaders!!

Commitment is Over-valued!!

Statutory Warning: This article is provocative!!

I have read enough about the power of positive attitude and related Gyan!

In my 2 decades of corporate training experience, I have met diverse people—that makes me think if words like attitude, commitment etc., are over-valued, in relation to Competence!

The word "Competence" is inextricably linked to the word "Role"; hence, let me take a common role, say, “Parent” as an example.

In a professional setup, one is not given a role unless one is “formally” trained to don that role. But, one tends to take on the role of a “Parent”, without any formal training—many tend to use “assumed competence”!!

It is easy to become a “Father”… but not that easy to be a “Parent”…

I have taken this role as an example since “Commitment” to this role can never be questioned in most parents! Most parents are indeed totally committed to their children’s welfare, success, growth etc… But, the gap is in the degree of “Competence”, in many cases!

Let’s consider some situations here:

-     How to handle a situation if the child brings the lunch box without eating the lunch fully?

o   Here, if one yells at the child or pulls up the child, the child DOES NOT learn to eat the lunch, but learns to empty the box in the trash can and bring it back, the next time!!

-     

      How to handle a child that argues back with the same logic or words that the parent had  used earlier, albeit in a different context?

o   How the parent handles the child at this point determines many aspects of the future behaviour/conditioning in the child!

-    

      How to “Influence” the child rather than “Control” the child?

o   Many parents try and control the child by the power of their position, without realising the loss of key factors such as Rapport, Trust etc. in the bargain!! Many parents do not have the basic knowledge on child psychology and hence are not aware of the truth that the entrance to the Mind is through the Heart!! It is key knowledge that children learn ONLY from people whom they “like”!!

-    

      How to discipline the child, without losing rapport and compassion?

o   As the famous quotation goes, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”… While it is imperative that every child needs to be disciplined at some stage, the actual “how” of it is sheer Competence.

In all the above examples, it is clear that Specific Competence is very essential, while mere Commitment cannot deliver results!! In fact, excessive commitment with much less competence leads one to frustration, anger and similar corrosive emotions.

While it is commonly understood that, it is always the mix of both commitment and competence that produces sustained results, the “right mix” is the point of discussion here.  It is in the context of the “mix” that I think Commitment is Over-valued!!

Pls don’t get me wrong—I am NOT saying that Positive Attitude or Commitment is not required!!

Many organisations today are measuring the “Potential/Attitude” of a person and are taking key decisions based on this parameter than on Competence!! Of what value is Potential if it does not get converted to Competence / Performance / Results?

After all, Potential Energy has to be converted to Kinetic Energy! Right?

Many organisations are giving senior roles to people who have demonstrated commitment to the company—at that level, competence takes a much higher weightage. Isn’t it? Many top leaders are very hesitant/embarrassed to sideline such committed people in favour of Competent Successors who could even be much junior!!

Weighing Commitment as much more valuable than Competence is a sure recipe for disaster, according to me!

In fact, the word “Commitment” requires a thorough dissection. I will share my thoughts in my next post…