Ratan Tata was once asked "What kind of ethical rules or codes apply in a startup culture which is surviving month-to-month, with no certainty of paying employees beyond a year?" "Shouldn’t the survival of the company and feeding your employee’s families be the priority, even if it means knifing someone in the back, or paying bribes in Indonesia or Vietnam"?
Tata turned pensive and said “I’m afraid I have to take a view that there’s no difference. Because it’s not a band that you cross, it’s a thread. You cross that line, and you’re on the other side.”
Staying ethical is relatively easier when you’re a massive group with 100 subsidiaries but what happens when you are a newbie and the whole world around you is playing devilish and creating barriers which are near impossible to jump without crutches of unthical practices. Could Microsoft, Facebook, Apple, Uber, Samsung, Reddit, Twitter, Oracle and many others would have made it so big without following those shady practices in their early days?
Some people believe it's OK to veer towards the shade of grey till the time you pull yourself out of a hole of obscurity and put yourself in position to do what’s right.
I wonder if this principle applies to paying some bribe to get a government job? Or by this principle, Is it justified on the part of politicians to use money and muscle power in fighting elections? They may do it on the pretext of greater good which they intend to bring to their locality. Is it justified on the part of budding entrepreneurs to give some kickbacks to bureaucrats or the politicians to get some business? See ultimately it is Business. If you put some money somewhere, you got to recover it. And it is not always about money. Simple situations like data manipulations in order to impress investors or customers here and there to gain some short-term benefits may also fall under this category.
Generally, Companies follow the model of VUEIM in resolving this. V stands for vision, U for users, E for employees, I for investors and M (Me) for the CEO or chief decision maker. This is followed in the decreasing order of priority.
The problem with violating these code of ethics, as beautifully summarized by Mr. Tata is It is a line which you cross and not the band. And it requires commanding nature of self-control and renunciation to say enough, just this last time for the sake of company. And nobody does it for others or company or organization. At the end of the day, we do it for ourselves.
But at the same time, such idealism is not considered pragmatic. The trees which do not bend are the first to be uprooted when the storm comes. Either your roots should be strong enough to bear the storm or be ready to be uprooted. Means, either the leader should be very adamant and stubborn to his principles and be prepared to take loads of criticism with a huge grin and wide faced smile or be casual about compromising his position.
So it is all about knowing yourself. What is your like dislike and limits and accepting the truth as it is. This situation is so difficult in a culture where corruption has become so integral part of our life. And it also depends on whether you believe in next life or not.
One very simple thought experiment can help in resolving this dilemma. If somebody hit you, what action do you take and why? If someone slaps me and I slap him back, then there is no point of claiming sainthood, You will do corruption when it is forced on you due to your opponent. If you do not slap him back because of being beaten blue or red then it indicates you'll do corruption when you could. If you do not slap him back because of your conscience then you are the next saint on this holy earth. Please post your charan here. I will touch them and take your blessings. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment