 |
|
Harvard Business School Ain’t What It Used To Be…. |
BusinessWeek is currently featuring a story on the purported influx of Desi inspired ideas into cutting edge American capitalism. Paint me a cynic but the piece takes a simplistic view of 1) what really happens in business or 2) what’s really uniquely desi philosophy or 3) both. The result is a mass of ethnic feel-goodness but not enough of a structured explanation to satiate a, uh, cynic like myself.
Our no-doubt well-intentioned writer christens the movement “Karma Capitalism” –
You might also call it Karma Capitalism. For both organizations and individuals, it’s a gentler, more empathetic ethos that resonates in the post-tech-bubble, post-Enron zeitgeist….while it used to be hip in management circles to quote from the sixth century B.C. Chinese classic The Art of War, the trendy ancient Eastern text today is the more introspective Bhagavad Gita.
BizWeek quotes different folks who take stabs at identifying what “it” is –
…One key message is that enlightened leaders should master any impulses or emotions that cloud sound judgment. Good leaders are selfless, take initiative, and focus on their duty rather than obsessing over outcomes or financial gain. “The key point“The key point is to put purpose before self”,” says Ram Charan, a coach to CEOs such as General Electric Co.’s (GE ) Jeffrey R. Immelt, “is to put purpose before self. This is absolutely applicable to corporate leadership today.”…”The best way to describe it is inclusive capitalism,” says Prahalad, a consultant and University of Michigan professor who ranked third in a recent Times of London poll about the world’s most influential business thinkers. “It’s the idea that corporations can simultaneously create value and social justice.”
The problem, of course, is that aside from the most narrow, cartoonish definition of capitalism, these aren’t groundbreaking revelations. While there’s value in packaging & codifying even the obvious, it’s not uniquely desi to identify the role of “purpose” in separating true business Leaders from mere Managers“Purpose” separates Leaders from mere Managers. Capitalism’s proponents starting with Adam Smith himself have readily accepted that the beast isn’t really all about the Benjamins. Many of Sepia Mutiny’s (over-)educated readership can readily change jobs to something better paid + less “purpose”-ful and yet choose not to. Making that choice doesn’t necessarily make you”anti-capitalistic”.
And at the other end of the wealth spectrum, what is it that motivates Jack Welch, Bill Gates, Larry&Sergei and the like beyond the incremental dollar? To weave together an answer for this question, and in the same breath as blue chip business talent like Ram Charan and CK Prahalad, the article points us at business lessons from one Swami Parthasarathy –
The speaker that evening was Swami Parthasarathy, one of India’s best-selling authors on Vedanta, an ancient school of Hindu philosophy. With an entourage of disciples at his side, all dressed in flowing white garments known as kurtas and dhotis, the lanky 80-year-old scribbled the secrets to business success (“concentration, consistency, and cooperation”) on an easel pad. “You can’t succeed in business unless you develop the intellect, which controls the mind and body,” the swami [Parthasarathy] said in his mellow baritone.…a young investment banker sought advice on dealing with nasty colleagues. Banish them from your mind, advised Parthasarathy. “You are the architect of your misfortune,” he said. “You are the architect of your fortune.”
 |
|
You’ve gotta write your OWN book girlfriend… |
Similarly, the integral role of self actualization in capitalism’s process is discussed in many other places. For example, I really enjoyed a recent WSJ OpEd by this year’s Econ Nobel Prize winner, Edmund Phelps –
I would, however, stress a benefit of dynamism that I believe to be far more important [to capitalism than just rate of return]. Instituting a high level of dynamism, so that the economy is fired by the new ideas of entrepreneurs, serves to transform the workplace–in the firms developing an innovation and also in the firms dealing with the innovations. The challenges that arise in developing a new idea and in gaining its acceptance in the marketplace provide the workforce with high levels of mental stimulation, problem-solving, employee-engagement and, thus, personal growth. Note that an individual working alone cannot easily create the continual arrival of new challenges. It “takes a village,” preferably the whole society [of capitalists].
The concept that people need problem-solving and intellectual development originates in Europe: There is the classical Aristotle, who writes of the “development of talents”; later the Renaissance figure Cellini, who jubilates in achievement; and Cervantes, who evokes vitality and challenge. In the 20th century, Alfred Marshall observed that the job is in the worker’s thoughts for most of the day. And Gunnar Myrdal wrote in 1933 that the time will soon come when more satisfaction derives from the job than from consuming. The American application of this Aristotelian perspective is the thesis that most, if not all, of such self-realization in modern societies can come only from a career. Today we cannot go tilting at windmills, but we can take on the challenges of a career. If a challenging career is not the main hope for self-realization, what else could be?
Wrote his own book…
<
p>While it’s debatable that “people need problem-solving” arose in Europe, the broader argument that Capitalism is also about addressing these aspects of the soul — something Socrates called “Thumos” or Spiritedness — rather than just dollars is still apparent. And to think that we can have all this talk about self-realization, purpose, spirit and dynamism without kurta-clad disciples…
<
p>Criticism aside, I do think the BW article actually does a pretty good job at obliquely highlighting a different desi success story. While tales of desi’s in tech and medicine are told far and wide, their cousins who stroll the mahogany panelled offices of American Capitalism — I-Banks, Consulting, and profs at B-schools — aren’t as well known –
About 10% of the professors at places such as Harvard Business School, Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Business, and the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business are of Indian descent…More important, Indian-born strategists also are helping transform corporations. Academics and consultants such as C. K. Prahalad, Ram Charan, and Vijay Govindrajan are among the world’s hottest business gurus. About 10% of the professors at places such as Harvard Business School, Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Business, and the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business are of Indian descent–a far higher percentage than other ethnic groups.
Still, the portion of the inquiry where I felt the most at home was the reaction some of these folks seemed to have when interviewed –
Whatever the common themes, India, of course, is hardly a showcase of social consciousness. While companies such as Tata Group or Wipro Technologies have generous initiatives for India’s poor, the country has its share of unethical business practices and social injustices. In addition, some Indian academics bristle at the suggestion that their background makes their approach to business any different. They’re quick to point out the wide range of religions, influences, and specialties among them.
So perhaps supply, demand, and self-actualization are universal after all? As I said earlier, I’m definitely cognizant of how important “packaging” is when it comes to pushing an idea forward. And it’s project management 101 that things get done more quickly if you’re willing to let other folks take credit for your ideas. International observors have often noted that it was Japanese (& Taiwanese) success in promoting an “Asian brand of capitalism” that comforted the Chinese that it was possible to adopt markets without becoming American. While it’s debatable just how different “Japanese” Capitalism was from it’s “American” counterpart, there’s no question that the 2 had more in common vs. competing ideologies in the 50s-80s. So perhaps a desi-pride centric take on capitalism might be useful for getting folks in the homeland to throw off the last mental chains of socialism.
so following a pattern set thousands of years ago, yet again the des is exporting religion and/or spirituality. and the times they are a’changing. i’m all for it!
This sounds kind of like socialism to me …
I’m always wary of people who try to incorporate eastern philosphies into western culture without really understanding the roots behind them. It seems that it generally yields little more than a bunch of catch phrases and almost always lacks any real substance.
Slates’ article “Why business execs love to quote Chinese proverbs” analyzes this trend.
From the article
Sriram, marketxarls – i’m not sure i agree with you. it comes down to shareholder value and a ceo or the board will not be vague about business decisions. there are strong business reasons to push altruism as a business practice, even if it is enveloped in esoterica. please ponder the following list and if you wish i can explain.
It might not be groundbreaking because at some point in history someone has had the same thought, but it’s a pretty hard left turn from the dot-com Enron culture (i.e., energy traders yelling “burn, baby burn” when hearing that destructive fires in California were driving up the price of energy), or 80’s Gordon Gekko culture (i.e., “greed is good”).
As for the universality of desi wisdom such as “be the architect of your own fortune,” I think universality is actually one of the distinguishing features of hindu religion (see Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna). So, it’s no surprise that kurta-clad disciples share a lot philosophically with Socrates. There is only one “truth” and it is the same whether coming from swamis, Dr. Phil or Tyra. Only the packaging is different depending on the audience.
Hairy D, I’ll agree with you on the first two items on your list and don’t know anything about the third. However, when it comes to BP, I assume you’re talking about their push for alternative energies and the like. I know very little about the company, but I’ve been told that it’s a bunch of hype. Now given the aversion energy companies have for alternative energy development, one can argue that even doing a little bit sets them apart from their competitors. I just don’t see them making any real shift in the way energy companies are operated.
In the realm of theory, anything can be spun around as anything. Given the length of Marxs’ writings, it wouldn’t be hard to find support individual freedom. Specifics macaca. I will side with a socialist/communist/jihadist/homosexual/sushitarian/ who demands govt raise minimum support price for food grains instead of importing them from a foreign country at a much higher price, than a capitalist who demands govt cut market-distorting food subsidies. The consumption led growth policy which translates into a monetary policy which allows you to take a “6% non-collateral loan on new car, but cannot provide a 14.5% loan with collateral to a farmer” is a caricature of capitalism, but i don’t find capitalists, libertarians, Libertarians protesting this, only so called verbal terrorists and communists.
Of course, you are a moderate who will say, “But this is not what we have in mind….” 😉
I am yet to see a capitalist argue against privatization, because there is no neutral,strong, capable regulator or entry barriers or high or information asymmetries are not removed.
8.
It should read “entry barriers are high”
Semi-unrelated, and speaking of desi entrenprenuers… here’s a post from famed silicon valley insider Om Malik’s blog GigaOm about desi YouTube partner, Jawed Karim. It references a recent lecture gave at U of I about how YouTube came to be…great viewing…
also, further unrelated…i had no idea mr. om malik was behind the long lasting indian party site…desiparty.com. weird.
maybe all you west coast guys knew that one…
Hey hey hey! easy fellas (and um…fellis) I don’t think I can argue that there isn’t some extreme and extremely silly phrase coinage going on there, but a notion that the article proposes, that I can’t find fault for, is – people bring their ‘ethnic’ ideas with them where they immigrate to – and so its not that weird that they find bridges between the Gita and business.
Whether or not Gita fits business (I’ll strongly argue that the part about doing your duty and not worrying about the results holds forever true) is one thing, if quoting Gita in business helps make future and current moneymakers less like enron pimps, that’s great!
random thought – when i was in grade 7 or may be 8 i remember asking my history teacher if socrates had his eyes gouged out before being killed – theguy scratched his head – i am not given to flights of fancy – and then threw his head back and laughed when he figured it out – i was remembering this bust of socrates such as the one above – i gues them greek sculptors werent good at etching eyeballs.
another random thought – of interest to ‘everything comes from india’ uncle – aristotle’s politics (i think) talks of this scylax dude who tripped to india and discovered an interesting governance practice we know today as … democracy. slam! take that you frenchies. desis were there first.
have a good weekend yall.
hairy_d:
Check out this interesting essay on democracy in ancient India. It provides a very nuanced view of how democracy in ancient India was widespread, but, like Athens/Rome, not open to everyone.
BTW, I sincerely feel that the message of the Gita has been grossly over-simplified. When people say that Krishna advised Arjun to do his duty, they often forget that the duty was to fight against and kill his own family and teachers. There is a serious ends-vs-means moral dilemmas involved here, questions of what actually constitutes one’s duty, and also what one owes to one’s friends and family, and what to oneself.
Karma Capitalism? Ewww.
Egoless management is almost oxymoronic in the business world where people believe (and attempt to make a sceince of) action and reaction.
Abhi blogged about this article here
Unfortunately some of the leading lights of ‘capitalism’ have more or less said so. A once famous and now washed out has been (whose theories played havoc) has gone on record that a business’s only social responsibility is to increase the wealth of its shareholders. Typically simplistic and superficial reading of Adam Smith. The people the BW article talks about are a distiguished lot. Mr.Parthasarathy (Before he became Swami Parthasarathy) used to lecture on the Gita with his daughter; and was a lawyer of some distinction having read maritime law in London. CK Prahalad IIANM comes from a family of Sanskrit scholars in Srirangam and is himself trained in classical debate and poetics. And this is a fairly free market of ideas so if a Fortune 500 company wants to retain the counsel of Ram Charan instead of Dr.Phil there must be a good reason. The BW article did a good thing putting the current mania in perspective. And Sakshi
that’s an oversimplification.
Now what’s the problem about making money? There are the four purusharthas right? Artha Kama Dharma and Moksha. The Tamizh classic TirukkuraL too contains three parts respectively regarding the accumulation of material wealth, ethics, and satisfaction of the senses. The KuraL is really pithy and strikes you with its insights like the sharp tip of a needle. I am sure Govindarajan, Prahalad and Parthasarathy are learned in the KuraL too.
Terribly interesting piece Vinod. As a point of interest, I was just talking to an Indian prof the other day about his view that “Indian philosophy” sees artha (wealth) in the same matrix as dharma (ethics) and moksha (salvation) – there is no inherent contradiction between any of these but merely a question of harmony and balance. Don’t know if this means much, but it does strike me that it is very different from the way these have been seen in relation to one another in the West.
Shiva:
Why? I think I characterized Arjun’s dilemma quite aptly. From Sir Edwin Arnold’s translation of the Gita:
I agree. No problem at all. Only I do not believe this is the focus of the Gita.
Instead of a translation how about the volume edited by JN Mohanty on ethical dilemmas in the Gita? Of course the four purusharthas aren’t the focus of the Gita. And I don’t mean to say so. It is certainly much more than that. You can talk about making wealth without reference to the Gita.
Many years ago when I was a junior grunt in the corporate hierarchy, I was assigned as a personal lackey to a major customer during a two-day customer conference. My charge was a semi-literate Texan who chew tobacco, wore a string tie and cowboy boots and had built a multi-million dollar business from nothing. I had to ask him how I could follow in his footsteps and what the top two or three qualities I would need to succeed in business. “Son, if you had only two or three top qualities, I am not sure you would even come out the chute,” replied the rodeo loving tycoon.
After years in business, I am convinced that there is no success kit out there, though some of the consultants are raking in billions selling solution-in-a-box.
sakshi
Thanks man. it was a thought provoking read.
sriram
sorry i couldnt Respond to you sooner sriram. i needed some time to look over the web sites for Total, Citgo, Bp, Shell, Petro-canada, IndianOil, Exxon to see if and how they promote their support for hte following (arguably not directly contrbuting to bottomline). here’s how they stacked up (I’ve used the initials)
support for environment (T, S) green business practices (T, B , S) community investment (T, P)
Higlights – Total seems to project the most commitment ot the people and the world. Petro-canada’s commitments seems to be driven through its roots as a regional player and as a legacy crown corporation.
At the end of the day, it is about communication. Definitely, BP made the connection because given the choice i would go to a BP over an Esso any day. they may be boiling wild horses to make jars of vaseline – but the vulture i am, at least it makes me feel sanctimonious as i pour in the gas.
Altruism and Whole Foods might not go hand-in-hand as harmoniously as one might imagine. Refer to http://www.ibiblio.org/prism/may98/whole.html on Whole Foods and union-busting, and http://www.slate.com/id/2138176/ for the sustainability of “organic” a la Whole Foods. To put it somewhat brutally: Whole Foods derives its cachet from the made-it-in-the-new-economy types, whose expensive educations tend to make them vaguely guilty about American-style consumerism, and who thus feel all warm and fuzzy about shopping at a chain store that projects itself as “altruistic”.
GB – i dont disagree with you – to echo my point earlier from the somewhat murky statement I made ot Sriram in #22 – marketing communications do not necessarily have anything to do with reality. it is about using ‘wholesome goodness’ as a selling proposition – an opiate for the masses (including i) who need sensory fulfilment and emotional upliftment to go hand in glove.
my point – this is marketing strategy – in reflection to the mood at large – ergo the altruistic packaging… not being cynical. businesses are in it to make money and be sustainable as they do so.
(shruti – i’m hoping you’ll chime in on these metrics, sustainability and community participation of big biz. i know you got stuff to share)
“marketing communications do not necessarily have anything to do with reality.”
Marketing communications disembodied from reality ultimately fails. As a business tool, marketing is simply not powerful enough to sell snake oil, at least not for long. Any business process that must connect with people before it can work is automatically subordinated to public opinion, and the public is a hard taskmaster. Whole Foods is not exempt from reality. Its reality is organic foods, and therefore there is no exaggeration in its marketing positioning. However, if you start brand extending its wholesome goodness into all kinds of altruistic causes, it will obviously come up short. Look at Wal-Mart. Its only claim to fame is low prices, and that’s downright real and honest. Everything else they have inflicted on our society is just collateral damage in fulfilling the ultimate goal. But why expect Wal-Mart to do otherwise? Why do people expect big business to be guardians of our society? Michael Moorism must stop.
As a long time ad man, I am always humbled by the consumer. I believe, actually I know, that business strategists much more successful than I feel the same respect for reality.