"It's Good to Talk?"

A professor in a classroom here in Mumbai tells me that he encourages his students to speak up in class. He says that the only way to ensure the students do so is to make speaking in class mandatory. “Once they understand this is the norm you expect, they’ll get used to it,” he says. “But you have to make it clear in India”. On the same day, the Chairman of an engineering company tells me that one of his Managing Directors from overseas has, “Just learned the difficult lessons that Indian employees don’t always tell you when something is going wrong. He’s just found out that saying nothing, means something”.

In Western society, communicating assertively is generally perceived as a sign of a healthy personality and those who are rather silent, tend to be devalued as shy, passive, or lacking independent opinions. Westerners perhaps make the assumption that talking is a positive act, a critical ingredient of independent thinking. By talking, an individual expresses his ideas, his points of view and individuality. Socrates viewed knowledge as existing within people and needing only to be recovered through verbal reasoning. Homer considered one of the most important skills for a man to have to be that of a debater. Freud of course believed that the critical success of any psychoanalysis was the patient’s ability to freely associate verbally his thoughts and feelings, with the voice of the internal critic held in abeyance.

In the consulting room is a client who is a Managing Director of one of the banks. Instead of hearing him say that rather overused legacy of the British, “I’m fine”, a sign of “Improvement” might be to hear the client verbalise more of the complexities of what is going on in his internal world. Things like, “Well, I’m struggling to maintain my enthusiasm at work, yet at the same time, I seem to be working 12 hours a day and can’t stop”. Narrative complexity as a sign of intelligence is one of the ways Western psychological models rate higher levels leadership consciousness. And of course such models are being imported into India. My culturally specific beliefs and assumption backed of course by evidence from Western psychology, suggests that this client will benefit most by such revelations aloud not only to himself, but with a skilled professional who is interested in him. In this relationship space of two people’s curiosity about the deeper motivations of this man, we hope that new personal awareness arises, and thus a richer picture of how he might live his life and conduct his business. A client may want to explore how he can relate better with his team members, how to energise and motivate staff across many geographies or how to deliver a profoundly moving speech.

But is such talking about such things valued in the context of a developing country like India? There are signs that it is, although perhaps the nature of the development process is not fully understood. This may be partly due to the lack of management education and development that focuses on the critical skills of relating in the workplace. After all, it is our ability to work together effectively and efficiently that gets things done and done well. However, most large Companies here now have 360 degree feedback processes, whereby an individual receives written feedback on the impact his leadership has. Yet judging by some of the reports I read here, they seem rather censored and “Nice”. Shame may also be attached to speaking with someone outside the immediate family, but also a sense of uncertainty of what this sort of relationship entails, and so it is easier to pick up a book on leadership, as though insights transplant themselves magically from the page to the leaders actions.

In the Indian tradition, personal development has historically focused upon meditation; the idea that silence and introspection will be beneficial for higher levels of thinking. In fact from this perspective, perhaps all this thinking and talking may indeed be viewed as the root of the client’s troubles. Talking might therefore be conceived of differently. Eckhart Tolle, known for his book “The Power of Now”, popular here in India as well as overseas, extolls the power of being in the present moment, promoting the importance of meditation, and other forms of contemplative activity. In a recent talk he gave, he rather humorously warned his students, “If you think you are enlightened, go and spend a week living with your relatives and see how reactive you still are”. He was also suggesting that meditation is not something to do to become better meditators, but to enable us to have greater peace and more harmonious relationships with others. He also warned that we babble too much, mindlessly filling up space with words like the ramblings of the disoriented madman we might see on the street. We say what we don’t mean, and we keep hidden what we really feel. And we say a lot, not only in speech, but critically in how we say things. Some evidence suggests that the greatest distortions in our communication are in the sound, the music of what we say, and the dance of how we use our bodies. If I verbally try to tell you I value you, whilst at the same time, using the tone of a depressed bureaucrat, with my arms folded as I gaze at the ceiling, you will get a very clear message from me. When we are unsure about someone’s intentions in their communication, we draw only 5% on the words, some 38% on the sound, and a massive 55% on body language. One of the most common criticisms of Indian leaders is their harshness with staff. This is often justified to me with comments like “it’s the only way to get them to do anything”. Yet as an outsider looking in, it seems to me that at times, rather sadist leadership virtually immobilises staff in a vicious circle of freeze and fear. One writer in response to the previous blog on cricket and coaching suggested to me that this harshness is developed in the Indian household, as the child observes his mother berating servants. Whatever the roots might be, it important that Indian leaders with aspirations to work in the International context understand there are much more rigorous expectations of their conduct.

All these ideas of “East” vs. “West” are of course a rather common post-colonial polarity. It is likely that the business man in India has far more in common with the business man in New York than the villagers in rural India. In fact internationally, all the leaders who have been measured and rated as having a higher level of leadership consciousness, report having both a regular practice such as mediation and being involved in some sort of dialogue with others as a means of their growth. The international evidence however, on influential communication, reminds us very clearly that if a leader wants his staff to speak out, he must role-model that behaviour himself. So, for example, if he wants his staff to be open about production or trading problems, whatever the issue might be, they will need to have witnessed their leader disclose his own personal challenges during his career. Of course, in order for someone to talk, there must be a listener. How good most leaders are at listening is questionable. Professor Richard Hackman from Harvard University, found that in his research on black-box data from flight crashes, that almost without exception, there was a dissenting voice saying early on there was a problem with the plane. Yet in each case, no one listened. The voice was too junior, too small to be taken seriously. Listening involves stepping into the agenda and perspective of another. One suspends one’s own greedy needs to say this or that, and let go of control of a conversation. Only those with solid enough self-esteem are good listeners.

No matter who we are, or where we are from, whatever unknown cultural codes are embedded in our being, we all share in common the never-ending decision-making about what to say and what not to say. When the veil between the conscious and the unconscious mind is thin, we will be verbally reactive, or blocked like cement so that we cannot find the flexibility to utter even one word.

I think it is fairly culturally safe to say that we are all on some level, longing for real human contact. The workplace is of course the site of our attachments with others. For many, it is not only a source of identity, of self-esteem it is also a place of belonging. Our leaders just like the teacher at the beginning of this piece signify what is expected, what is permissible and what degree of depth in relating to one another is “normal”. Leaders of course do this, not only by what they say, and whether they have the confidence to be good listeners, but in what they do.

As Gandhi put it, “My life is my message”.

"What Do You Expect?"

As international citizens, thinking people, whatever national identity we wear, however tightly fitting it might be, we choose how we engage with matters of the world at large.  Just as the bureaucrats, police and politicians can decide their particular ethical brand and style of participation in political processes, equally each one of us decides the degree to which we attempt to participate in developing a democratic and fair world.

India right now, is abuzz with social activism as a citizen movement led by Anna Hazare demands the right to a corrupt-free India. Hazares “Fast unto Death” pledge has created a renewed sense of hope and vitality that there is huge commitment and citizenship willing to show-up and be involved in shaping the evolution of the country.  In a similar vein to the trajectory of Nelson Mandela, who virtually became President of South Africa from his prison cell, it appears Anna Hazare is rapidly becoming the moral commander of India. Along with him, countless Indians took a pledge to fast, whilst 100,000s protested across the country. Those who were fasting, including Hazare are eating once again, thanks to political pledges to design an adequate anti-corruption Jan Lokpal Agreement.  But it’s clear that Hazare will be back on his “Fast unto Death”, and no doubt thousands of others will join him if his expectations are not met. His passion, his commitment is rooted very firmly in the plight of the poor of India, who after all, suffer most at the hands of corruption.

The very moment expectations of incorruptibility falls, evolutionary pressure bears down and we start to experience shifts. Evolutionary pressure to be better depends on expectations of standards regarding honesty or corrupt practices, which the drafting of the Jan Lokpal Bill seeks to address.  If the public has low expectations, they will end up confirming them.  In turn, this leads to further citizen apathy.  Apathy is understandable, given the anti-corruption bill has been presented eight times since 1968 to no avail.

Despite the country’s population of over a billion people, the average number of whistle-blowers complaints of corruption through the Central Vigilance Commission, between 2005 and 2009, was a paltry annual average of 346.  This cannot possibly be apathy alone, but a process that doesn’t work. System blockages, lack of flow, a sense there is no one to turn to, leaves any community constipated by its problems. When bureaucrats around the world evade their ethical responsibilities by hiding in procedural and plumbing excuses, it saps the human spirit.  It erodes a dignified sense of empowerment. It also tells us of the low level of leadership development, known in psychological circles as the “Expert” level of leadership we are dealing with. In psychological terms, it is the tyranny of “Schizoid” functioning.  This is a clinical term to describe a constellation of lack of affect, of emotional deadness, a cold, indifference towards others, often accompanied by insidious smirks and other odd physical characteristics. A constipated culture blocks our energy so much so, that for many, it appears they exist under a veil of depression.  Yet escaping to complacency and apathy, as I am clearly hinting at here, maybe a disease more virulent than at least attempting to shape our global evolution, even if we fail.

What is powerful here in India, unlike say the social activism of Egypt, is that the youth of India have the stately leadership figure of Anna Hazare, whose commitment to the people of India is dignified and impressive. Unlike India, other social movements have faced the tyranny of insidious press silence, no access to the internet or telephones.   In the minds of many here, perhaps assisted by the articulations of the press, the spirit of Gandhi has returned, as has a degree of faith in leadership and decency.  Once again, this “Second Freedom Struggle” as the press are coining it, arises from a base of personal, rather than positional power.

Great expectations energise the bureaucrats and politicians against corruption and keep the fire of political and social activism burning. While power corrupts and corruption undermines the legitimacy of power, the prospects for social and economic development crucially depends on the evolution of a web of expectations. Your expectations, my expectations.  All expectations begin in the mind, with a simple self-reflection, of “How do I expect to be treated?” Higher levels of consciousness ask, “How do we expect our children to be treated?” Higher levels again, ask “What should all our children’s children have a right expect?”  

“Will this movement fizzle out?” some ask. I doubt it. There’s too much (1) vision for a corruption-free India, too much traction of real (2) dissatisfaction and too much solid thinking concerning (3) implementation. These are the three ingredients required for deep change to occur.  Time will tell no-doubt.  Nevertheless, within two days of Anna Hazare ending his fast, the Finance Minister announced that India will be ratifying the United Nations convention on corruption “Soon”.   This will mean that it is much easier to reclaim corruption money in tax havens overseas, that official will be expected to comply with codes of conduct, and disclose financial assets.  As the UN literature states, "offences committed in support of corruption, including money-laundering and obstructing justice, are also dealt with."   

The day I write this, a friend of mine is angry and despairing of the corruption dilemma he faces.  There are consequences if he accedes to paying a bribe and there are consequences if he doesn’t.   My only advice to him is to “Imagine you are ninety years old, looking back on your life, what you want to see that you did today?” Sadly, whether in a country or a corporation, the human citizen is often feels left with merely one final recourse of action.  I will give you my feedback about this country, about this corporation by leaving.  Talent walks out the door, and takes a plane somewhere else.  This beautiful country called India will potentially lose a critical mass of talent if basic expectations of decency are not met. When leaders don’t listen fully and act expediently what else can they expect? The significant factor distinguishing those of higher levels of leadership is timely action.   “Soon” cannot be soon enough.

"India's Cricket Lessons"

This is a tribute to Gary Kirsten the coach to the India Cricket team. What a fantastic result Team India. It feels a huge honour to be living in the City of Mumbai, home to the match, probably the most exhilarating place in the world on the winning Saturday night. The whole City came to a celebratory standstill, as people face-painted with the red, green and white of the Indian flag danced on top of their cars along Marine Drive and the sky lit up with fireworks in all directions within seconds of the match win.

Coach Gary, a former South African cricketer’s favourite motto is: “There is no greater waste of a resource than that of unrealised talent”, (the words of the former U.S. president Roosevelt). Talent development is all about reducing the gap – the gap between current performance and desired performance. When you are on your knees utterly empty of any belief in yourself, the coach lends you their relentless confidence in you, “I was thankful to him for keeping his faith in me when I was going through a tough phase,” says player Suresh Raina. When the comfort of laziness creeps in, the coach, in as aggressive or warms a manner as is required, reminds the player to step-up and be all he can be.

As a coach he helped the players identify both their individual areas for growth and blind-spots in performance, as well as, in their strengths and weaknesses in the team functioning. He motivated them to believe in themselves, to believe in each other, that they could pull-off this outstanding result for their country. He worked with the team to develop their emotional as well as physical fitness, as well as their game-strategy.

Coaching business leaders has everything in common with coaching sports players and teams. In fact, several years ago, I worked with an Investment Bank, alongside Clive Woodward who at the time was successfully coaching the England Rugby team. The critical ingredient, despite immense talent, was that this global team had a crippling sense that they could not win accolades like Euromoney because a competitor institution was in their group mind “better, more talented”. They weren’t. The other team just had more belief in themselves. Through a series of leadership and coaching strategies we created a winner.

When the coach sits in front of a guy who he or she knows can reach higher and higher levels in his performance, the coach is looking at two things. Firstly, is the guy motivated to excel, to be the best he can be? What degree of skills-gap are we looking at here? A good coach is essentially an artist. An artist works creatively to get under the skin of another human being. Sometimes deliberately making them angry to evoke change, other times nurturing that tender spot in the psyche that has produced a highly critical voice inside the person that impairs their performance. It’s mind-training, it’s strategy-building and it’s behavioural training. We coaches end up loving those we nurture, especially the ones that fight with their hearts and souls to bring out the best in themselves and offer the gift of their talents to the world. Knowing you matter to the coach is highly critical for the relationship to work, “Gary treated us like family”, as player Sehwag put it.

Whether cricket, business or Bollywood, the person you want to coach is the one who wants to live his or her life asking “How can I do better”, “How can I show-up more”, rather than merely point the finger at others and say “But I couldn’t do it, because, because, because”. They are the curious souls who want to make sense of themselves, of why they do this, and why they don’t do that. For us coaches, they are treasured people who live in our hearts and minds, who keep us awake at night when they are in the throes of transformation, and remain with us, often many years after their physical presence has left our lives.

I don’t know who you are reader. If you’re a cricket fan, you can pretty much rest assured that Gary Kirsten gave everything of himself to coach that team. And he will have given up a lot in his own life to do this, especially his family. That’s what we do. We turn ourselves inside out to make growth and transformation possible, because it’s often what makes us feel happiest and most purposeful in our lives.

But something puzzles me about India. We have these incredible cricket guys, who clearly are entrepreneurs of their own growth and development. These players made a proactive decision to work with someone who can help them grow individually and collectively. Of course they may have been defensive and didn’t like the feedback at times. That’s natural because change is difficult. Yet, are business leaders in India as committed entrepreneurs to their own growth as these players? It seems to me that many business leaders in India tend to leave their growth utterly to chance or pay minimal lip-service to it.

Whether you are a cricket player or a leader, the only way towards higher level performance is through feedback. Feedback maybe about the way you relate on the pitch or in the corporate boardroom, feedback concerning how you manage your emotions and your energy when you perform. A good coach (read good leader) tells you, “I love the way you do x”, “I don’t like the way you do y”, and “What I want you to do is z”. One of the leaders as coach I worked with would be saying this sort of coaching language 30-40 times a day to her team members.

Discussing this over dinner, Indian friends tell me that I underestimate the way many business men and women in Mumbai dislike criticism. I try to explain that feedback highlights strengths, highlights areas for development. That feedback is not about who you are. It’s about ways to improve your behaviour. It’s the exciting fact that as we achieve one stage of potential, yet another emerges. What you do, when you start to interrogate yourself, with someone else, when you start to question your tacit assumptions about yourself about other people, you start to wake up. You also then start to be a different kind of person. One man, in his early forties tells me that few of his colleagues are prepared for even thinking about themselves, because their mothers have been telling them they are perfect, just because they are boys, since the day they were born. I respond that this doesn’t explain the profound commitment of the India Cricket team, who were also boys once, to their growth and development, which after all, led to a profoundly exhilarating ‘win’ for the whole country.

Perhaps there is something yet to evolve more fully in India, in terms of education concerning what personal and professional development is; particularly concerning emotions, communication and relationships.  Personally, I celebrate the courage of the India cricket team as role models of commitment to growth, to endeavouring to look in the mirror and ask “How can I improve” and having the courage to get expert help to make those changes real.

Perhaps this is the deeper, more profound lesson that Indian cricket offers. The true nature of winning is in overcoming ourselves.  It is also an enormous tribute to the likes of Sachin Tendulkar, confident enough to graciously acknowledge Gary in today’s Asian Age with the words “I want to thank Gary. He has to be given credit as he instilled a bit more self-belief in us. We have been very consistent during the last two years and this is a result of that. I have really enjoyed my game under him.”

I want to end this blog with the words from a speech in the film “Any Given Sunday”. My appreciation and tribute to the exceptional Team India, a part of which was Coach Gary Kirsten. In the film, Al Pacino plays the coach to a soccer team (I’ve changed the word soccer to cricket for fun). It is a profoundly moving speech in the film, just before the team is about to go into the game like Sri Lanka vs. India, the game of their lives:

“I made every mistake a middle-aged man can make – I threw away all my money, I chased off anyone who’s ever loved me and lately I don’t even like the face in the mirror. You know, when you get old in life, things get taken from you. That’s part of life. You find out that life’s a game of inches and so’s cricket – because in either game, life or cricket, the margin for error is so small, I mean half a step too late or too early, you don’t quite make it. One half second too slow too fast you don’t quite catch it. The inches are everywhere around us, in every break of the game every minute every second.

On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch, because we know that when we add up all those inches, that’s gonna make the fxxking difference between winning and losing. Between living and dying. I’ll tell you this – in any fight it’s the guy who’s willing to die for that inch. And I know if I’m going to have any more life in me, it’s because I am willing to die and fight for that inch. Because that’s what living is, the six inches in front of your face. Now I can’t make you do it. You’ve got a look at the guy next to you and you’ll see a guy who will sacrifice himself for this team, because he knows when it comes down to it, you’ll do the same thing for you. That’s a team gentlemen. And either we heal now as a team, or we will die as individuals.

That’s cricket guys. That’s all it is.”