Wednesday 14 January 2015

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!!


3 comments:

  1. Ranga, learnt from this post on why people name their children after a few people.. God bless..

    I also feel that one of the reasons why people may prefer loyalists is that a loyalist would agree to whatever he / she is told (to do too).. A person committed to a cause may however give a perspective that is very different;and when that different perspective involves taking an action that one is not ready for, then it makes it that much more difficult to face..

    ReplyDelete
  2. In my humble optionion, one primary reason why leaders or founders of startups prefer loyalists is because they cannot find people who are committed to the same values, hence they go with the next best thing loyalists who do as they are told. Many founders of startups have a fallout later due to disagreements with commitments (sell off vs continue etc.)

    ReplyDelete