The Indian way? No way

[gubbi]

The Indian way? No way
The national culture of unquestioned obedience to authority along with an acceptance of shoddiness must not be used as an excuse to overlook violations of corporate ethics, says the Ranbaxy whistle-blower.

During my tenure at Ranbaxy, I was surprised by the unchallenged conformity to the poor decisions of senior leadership. Ranbaxy was my first Indian employer following my tenure at two different American corporations. Reflecting on this experience from cultural and comparative perspectives highlights the organizational peril of such behaviour.

It is in our culture to respect authority. We are taught from childhood to listen and obey our elders. We grow up with the notion that our managers, the function heads and business heads within our respective organisations, know more than anyone else. Hierarchy is revered, authority is seldom questioned. Those who dare to ask questions are renegades.

Asking questions

My investigation into the discrepancies between Ranbaxy’s records and the data filed with regulatory agencies in 2004 showed me how wide the questionable behaviour was within the organisation. It was systematic. It had penetrated the DNA of the organisation.

I often asked myself how was it that smart, well-intentioned people tolerated systematic fraudulent behaviour? This question led me to the Milgram Experiment, which was conducted by the Yale University psychologist, Stanley Milgram, in 1961. In the 1971 paper summarising its results, he stated:

Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

Why is this important? In my view, as much as we value and respect our traditions, it is imperative that we not lose sight that being a “renegade” — a nonconformist — is acceptable when motivated by honourable intentions. It is acceptable to think that managers possess neither omniscience nor omnipotence. Our colleagues who are at the lowest rung of the corporate ladder sometimes know more than we do about an issue. It is important to encourage them to question authority, even if we find it uncomfortable and disconcerting.

The other aspect of my search for answers led me to introspection. What kind of society have we become? D.G. Shah, the secretary general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance, recently penned an elegant op-ed that called out our culture for tolerating corruption, even with needs as basic as drinking water, personal hygiene, food and medicine. Why is it that we have come to accept poor governance, corruption, incompetence and entitlement as facts of life?

Compromise

I think it has a lot to do with how we lead our daily lives. Despite an exhaustive search, I have not been able to find proper translation for the concept of jugaad. It seems to exist only within our society. While Wikipedia describes it as a term applied to a creative or innovative idea providing a quick, alternative way of solving or fixing a problem, I think it misses two important aspects that I have experienced during my tenure working in India. First, there is an implicit understanding that because the solution needs to be quick and creative, it is acceptable to make a compromise on the quality of what is produced. Second, because we focus on making “it” work just-in-time, we never think of making the solution last. That leads to poor quality.

Not 100 per cent

The other pervasive attitude is the notion of chalta-hai. It is very hard to describe this attitude to someone who has not experienced life in India, but to those of us who have lived here, we know what it is. We have come to accept that if it is 80 per cent good, works 80 per cent of the time, and does 80 per cent of what it needs to do, it is acceptable. This attitude manifests itself in almost every facet of common life in India.

Clearly, we are now beginning to see the results of our approach with jugaad and our attitude with chalta-hai. They are not pleasant. Recent events hold a mirror to our face and ask us whether we like what we see. I certainly don’t.

As Jayson Blair, the disgraced former reporter at The New York Times, said, “Rarely are our choices in life presented as a major dramatic question. One step at a time, [they come as] minor choices, that may not even seem related to the ultimate outcome. Once that fear [of getting caught] disappears with the minor choices, it is easier to cross that big ethical line.”

It is not the big ethical line that we need to worry about. Rather, we need to worry about all the thousands of little situations we are presented with in our daily lives, to which the easy answer seems to be jugaad or the attitude of chalta-hai.

Unless we develop an attitude of “do it right the first time” and inculcate this expectation into our daily life, we will continue to see the same image in the mirror every time an event like the one on May 13 holds it up to our face.

Comments?

 

[gubbi]

Some "recommended comments" in the comments section of the Op-Ed

An extremely well argued and thought provoking article. As a person of
Indian origin myself, I can say that the values espoused in Indian
culture of tolerance, respect for elders, are magnificent qualities
that have kept the society going on despite unimaginable challenges. A
serious blot on the India of today is the wide-spread culture of
corruption that seems to have taken a vicious hold on the people. In
my recent visit to India, I found even highly placed people express a
total despondence about the probity of people running the country. In
the first 4 decades since independence, this sense of utter
helplessness was mainly directed at the lower to mid-levels of the
administration. The highest leaders were assumed to be clean with
interests of the country at heart. Such a sentiment today sadly
appears to be the exclusive preserve of a few who have no interest in
asking questions.
India can still redeem itself through the timeless principle of Dharma
that is her priceless heritage.
from: CS Venkat
Posted on: Jun 12, 2013 at 16:25 IST

Thanks for penning down your thoughts in a very clear and eminent way.
Right time to start a Honesty, Ethics and integrity Subject in last year
of Schooling(plus2) and also last year of College Degree. Need to stress
the importance of same in society for their own benefit and their future
generations. (Instead of Putting our brain to work to pick 3 languages for
all 12 years of schooling, we could focus on teaching kids the right way
of getting things done in society, Now Having RTI, we don't need to
complain now).
from: govind
Posted on: Jun 12, 2013 at 15:15 IST


easier to toe the line unquestioningly - alternative - one needs to
start thinking and acting independently - too tiring in the Indian heat
and against centuries of evolution.
from: Venk
Posted on: Jun 12, 2013 at 02:57 IST

 

[livingdead]

I am always for western style truth as opposed to eastern style harmony. We are taught since childhood that being obedient is a virtue.
My dad used to tell me the story of casablanca's son, who refused to abandon the deck of the ship because his dad told him not to do so, and perished when deck exploded. Even as a child I used to think.. 'what an idiot.. although never said it aloud for fear of being thrashed

 

[sankranti]

This is a good article and a very valid point of view.

Listening to your 'elders', obeying your 'superiors' are all classic symptoms of a Feudal society.

Look at the British ......they have clear cut case of obeying their 'superiors' and any young upstart will be shown their place. The French on the other hand are perpetual 'rebels' a.k.a people who do not obey anyone but listen to their own heart.

To claim 'Indian culture' lays more stress on 'obeying elders/superiors' might not necessarily be true.
Indian culture also lays more stress on analytical thinking and reasoning and encourages people to think for themselves while providing moral guidelines to frame thought.

Now not everybody can be thinkers ..... so in Indian culture, people who think for others (religious leaders, political leaders etc..) also do not claim to be completely right and absolute.

Taittiriya Upanishad for e.g. provides the foundation by stating "matrudevo bhava, pitrudevo bhava, acharyadevo bhava, atithidevo bhava...." ...to be translated as " Treat your Mother as you would treat God, Treat your Father as you would treat God, Treat your Acharya (Teacher) as you would treat God, Treat your Guests as you would treat God". Minor point to be noted is that Mother comes before Father in the pecking order. This is one of the fundamental philosophies that guide 'Indian culture'.

But the Bhagvat Gita also tells Arjun to go against his elders in the battle of Mahabharat as Fighting for what is right and just is MORE important than following and obeying your 'elders'. Even killing for what is right is more important than obeying your elders/superiors. This guiding philosophy is also integral to 'Indian culture'.

In fact the ENTIRE FREEDOM STRUGGLE was based on 'NON COOPERATION' and being a Rebel. This approach was taken by Mahatma Gandhi because he understood 'Indian culture' and he knew 'Indian culture' would take the path of least resistance by fighting what that is wrong. He just molded his political strategy to suite Indian culture. That is what makes him a genius, He really understood India. He also understood the fact that most Indians where 'non violent' due to the same 'Indian culture' and only a 'non violent' struggle will supported by the majority. This is also an important point to remember.

Last point w.r.t hinduguy observation that Indians are taught being obedient is a virture while insinuating that europeans are not taught to be obedient. That is a absurd and laughable statement. The whole point of being 'obedient' and not questioning your superiors came from the 'WEST'. The whole military doctrine of soldiers maintaining strict discipline and not questioning order came from the west. Indians had to be taught this by the French and British Military commanders. Western style 'truth' is to claim to know the whole truth and rest of the people to Obey and unquestioningly follow that version of the 'truth'. Indians on the other hand are encouraged to question the 'truth' and each of us is asked to discover our own 'truth'.

My father also taught me the story of casablanca's son, who refused to abandon the deck of the ship because his dad told him not to do so, but at the same time he also taught me the Upanishads, the smriti and the shruti and the vedas and the puranas. He also taught me to ask 'why' every-time and seek answers. I can only say 'hindguys' parents did him a great disservice why leaving him uneducated in 'Indian culture' and it acts as no surprise that he then looks at the west to teach him ethics and morality.